Wellwood's Battle
Kyle Wellwood is slated to go toe to toe with Mike Gillis on Tuesday at his arbitration hearing. Wellwood and his agent will argue that 27 points and 10 PP goals is good enough for a far heftier raise than what Gillis qualified him at (a little north of a million dollars). Gillis will argue that he played himself off the first two lines, scored five of his 18 goals after Christmas and needs to show far more of a complete game to be worthy of higher salary.
Surely Gillis wouldn't mind him back (he did qualify him afterall). Last season Wellwood accepted his ever-changing role without any complaints (SOB should take note). He was surprisingly proficient on the PP and became a decent part of the checking line when the playoffs rolled around. The only thing Pudge didn't do last year was play in net and maybe he would have if Lu needed a bathroom break.
But Gills has a team to manage with precious few millions left to find a defenseman, extend Lu, pay for a team outing to see Megan Fox in Transformers 2, you know the essentials. Personally I think the Wellwood debate has become some sort of rallying cry in recent weeks. It reminds me of last summer when Vigneault looked like he was getting the axe and much of the online reaction was "But he won the Jack Adams!" which was fine until you looked and realized that award doesn't mean anything.
I wouldn't pretend to know what his angle is, but I have to ask: did Pudge choose to fight an uphill battle he can't win?
By choosing the arbitration route, I think he's got three things working against him:
1. The ES numbers
I started looking at this around 5:00 AM (because sleep is overrated) the other morning in the comments of another Wellwood post:
Pudge’s 27 points put him in the same family as Jochen Hecht ($2.3 million), Kyle Brodziak ($495,000), Andy Hilbert ($650,000), and Mike Comrie ($3.3 million). The lone difference were his 10 PP goals (55.5% of his total production last year) which you can argue this is an anomaly as it’s over double his career best (meanwhile his three PP assists was a career worst). Also at least five of those goals were rebounds off the board that found Wellwood with an open net staring at him. Wonderful timing, but not a skill that’s going to repeat itself year to year. On average, both Hansen and everyone’s punching bag Bernier had better point paces.Demitra(!) and Hansen blocked more shots. Pudge had the third most giveaways on the team. His plus/minus was 2, good enough for 277th best in the league. And yes he had great face off percentage. So did Yanic Perreault in yester years and he was averaging damn near 12-15 points more a season in less games than Pudge.
That was my blurry-eyed start, but I basically cherry picked a handful of stats that fit at the time.
Along with his defensive play, I think we can casually agree that Wellwood's top two strengths last year were:
- PP goals - 10 goals with the man advantage tied him for the team lead with KesLORD.
- Faceoff winning percentage - He ended the season with 57.7%, the best on the team.
If we ignore SO's and empty net situations, and we know he's productive on the man advantage and damn near never used on the PK (run a report on him here), then what's left is his even strength play. To do so, we'll need Behind the Net, every stat hound's best friend (whereas decimal points frankly scare me).
Right off the bat, he had the third lowest ES TOI in front of regulars Ryan Johnson and Darcy Hordichuk who we can agree are limited to playing in specific situations.
Wellwood's season Corsi was -5.2. The Corsi number, for those who don't know, is similar to +/- but shows how many shots were directed at the individual's net (denoted with a "-") and how many at the opponents (denoted with a "+"). It's a quick look at how effective a player may be at even strength and, for Pudge, he's wedged between Sundin (-.9) and Bolduc (-5.3). Both his linemates later in the season were lower: Bernier ( -7.2) and Pyatt (-10.6).
His Corsi tells just part of the story. Wellwood's 5-on-5 rating was -0.07 which reflects the shift in a team's GF/GA differential when Pudge was on the ice per 60 minutes of ice time. -0.07 is middle of the pack, if not edging into the lower ranks. Both linemates later in the season were also lower: Bernier (-0.45) and Pyatt (-0.87). Not great numbers for someone who is prided on defensive skills.
The quality of the competition Pudge faced was ranked a 0.00 (the higher the number, the higher the "relative strength" of the opposition he's on the ice against). Both Pyatt (.05) and Bernier (.03) saw stronger players so Wellwood's qualcomp was probably affected by missing games and stints on the fourth line where guys like Hordichuk are ranking at the qualcomp bottom (depending on the minimum amount of games you're looking at). Regardless, Wellwood saw the average in his opposition.
Playing with his unemployment brothers or sometimes with Hordichuk did hinder Wellwood's EV effectiveness. Pudge's qualteam ranking (the quality of his linemates) was -0.25 or third worst on the team (hell, even here Hordichuk brings down Johnson who was his regular linemate). So it's unfair to suggest Wellwood's struggles are his alone. Though it does beg three additional questions: can Wellwood alone elevate the play of the third line? How does resurrecting two/thirds of the same line (Wellwood/Bernier) position the team any better heading into next season? And does Vigneault trust him at him at ES regardless of linemates?
Numbers don't always tell the complete story, but they do show Wellwood had a limited skill set last year: if he wasn't out on the PP, then he wasn't offering much. Yes he can play defensively and maybe more digging around would find greater statistical relevance on that front, but he alone wasn't elevating the line either. No matter where he ends up, he needs a better regular season at ES if he wants to be paid as a premier player.
2. The "kid"
Remember a few seasons ago when the center ranks for the Canucks were laughable? You'd have Morrison, Henrik and then a bunch of no namers (leading to hilarious Chouinard-like experiments). Barring another Sundin situation, the top two slots are Hank and Kesler leaving Pudge to be in line for the third or fourth slot.
Last year he eventually fell to the third line, however that's exactly where many have Cody Hodgson pegged to start his NHL career. There's a whole host of variables that come with that, not the least of which is Hodgson needing a good camp to show he's ready for the dance. But the safe money is that he'll make it.
Wellwood may have had a stronger footing a few years ago, but if it really does come down to Hodgson Vs Wellwood, I imagine management would be behind Hodgson. Rarely have you seen a prospect so well-groomed and anyone connected to the organization is at risk of breaking their legs falling over themselves praising him and his future. If he makes the cut, then expect Hodgson to get limited ice-time and choice opportunities on the PP to become more acclimated to the game and that could come at Wellwood's expense. It's a gamble to replace an experienced player with a rookie, but a gamble worth taking, especially if it saves cap space to shore up the team in other areas.
Pudge could always shift to wing, but in that case, he's still in trouble because he'll be fighting Bernier, Raymond, Rypien and Hansen (should he stay) along with Grabner and maybe a prospect like Desbiens or Glass for one of the remaining slots on the wing in the bottom six. There's always a chance for the top six if when Demitra gets injured...
3. The baggage
This one is completely subjective, but if I'm Gillis I approach Pudge the same way I did with SOB. Something like "Look, we want you here but X and Y have to be better on your end. So here's a one year deal and we'll work with every step of the way on fixing X and Y. If you do, great, we'll talk long term next summer. If not, we'll adjust expectations and see what's in our mutual best interest then."
On the level and fair. SOB agreed, presumably because he knows he can play better and believes he can improve the Vancouver squad at the same time. Wellwood, for whatever the private criticisms are, is viewing it differently.
That's clearly his right, but he's doing it on a team where the heart and soul guys (Kesler & Burrows), the youth (Edler), the A list (Sedins) and hopefully the goalie are all taking less to an extent in the hopes of creating a better team and a winning atmosphere.
We're coming up on the end of July and there's plenty of FA's left, a reality of the economic climate and gun-shy GM's who aren't opening their wallets quickly (except Sather). Now along comes Wellwood, hat in hand, taking the team that gave him a shot to arbitration while only one year removed from multiple game scratches, fairly obvious consistency problems and going ignored on waivers twice which itself followed a camp where the coach publicly blasted his conditioning and a summer fall out with soccer and the Leafs organization based on, yup, poor conditioning (which he blames the Leafs for).
We Canuck fans are quick to point out the better points of his character: his versatility, his willingness to help out the team in whatever capacity, etc. But if we're going to be honest you have to take everything into account and his past isn't exactly a ringing endorsement. Are other GM's taking notice one way or the other?
************************
I would be happy to see Wellwood back at a number that makes sense. I would be pleased to see him out there with his shifty skills. I'd be ecstatic to see him (or anyone for that matter) score on the power play. Maybe if his agent and Gillis had more time to hash out whatever the specific number is each side is looking for it wouldn't have gotten to this. But now it's going to be in the arbitrator's hands and 4.4 million in cap space, while certainly not impossible, leaves very little wiggle room.
Again, Wellwood is entitled to his arbitration rights, but he isn't entitled to a roster slot just because he was a shootout and powerplay specialist last season that wants to be paid like a complete package next season.
Maybe Wellwood wins with the decision next week. If he does, good for him. But that doesn't mean he's a Canuck when camp opens. And, if Gillis balks at the decision and Pudge becomes a UFA, how damaging may that be to the team, if at all?
66 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
As much as I am a Wellwood fan, I can’t help but agree with almost everything you said. Those stats you posted paint a telling story. Maybe Woodrow only gets $1.1 million….maybe he gets $1.8 and then we have to trade him….
I don’t know if his storied past will hinder every GM out there. His turnaround story this year must have raised some eyebrows.
Hard to say.
The pressure is completely on Hodgson. He is going to have to stick or else go back to the OHL. I really don’t think CoHo lets that happen, but you never know. Like you said, if they move Pudge to the wing, the competition is even more stiff there, because Raymond has to be a lock by now.
Someone is getting traded by October. We have too many forwards.
We have too many forwards.
Yeah, and how many of them can hit the side of a barn? That’s been my problem with Canuck scoring for a number of years. Other than the twins, I can’t think of anyone who has an accurate shot, not even Wellwood. He does, however have scoring ability. My problem with Gillis is that he hasn’t signed any scorers beside Danny and Hank. If he lets Wellwood go, he’s given up some scoring potential on an otherwise piss poor offense. Here’s hoping Coho can hit the side of a barn.
by Bobby Canuck on Jul 24, 2009 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions
We do have too many forwards and of the bottom six variety too (same problem I think Calgary has). Doesn’t necessarily make them that much easier to trade either. It’s a shame too because I think it’ll cost us at least Hansen and I always liked him, especially on the PK.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 24, 2009 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Some of them are projected to be in the top 6 though: Grabner, Bernier, Raymond. They should find the net eventually rather than be fails.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 24, 2009 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions
Top six is Sedins/Burrows followed by Kes/Demo/Sammy (seiously, that guy needs a name because I’m not typing out Samuelsson all year long). Or some variation there of. I’m not sure either Grabner, Bernier or Raymond can crack those six but whenever Demo gets hurt, then sure!
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 24, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Oh I see what you were getting at. I thought you were just labeling them as bottom 6 NHL forwards in general.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 24, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Raymond could handle replacing Demo on the off-chance he sustains injury =)
He stepped up quite a bit during the play-offs, after all.
Raymond is on the cusp…and he is now in the final year of his contract. How much more motivation does he need?
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 25, 2009 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Jeez, I’m still trying to digest those stats. So Wellwood’s goals against average / 60 minutes while on the ice was 1.79, good for 4th best on the team. But then that stat gets skewed because he was getting all those PP minutes and less 5 on 5.
Yes, we need a name for Samuelsson. We already have a Sammy. We could always call Salo “Sally”…
Call Samuellson “Mikey” or “Mickey”
Call him twinless, that you’ll know the Swedish forward you speak of.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 24, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Also what I find crazy about Pudge is I really thought, prior to even looking, that he occasionally made it out for a PK. But if you run that frozenpool.com report on him (I love that site) he was out there maybe three times.
I honestly question if Vigneault has any faith in him at even strength, I really do.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 24, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions
If Wellwood plays for AV this year, I project more PK time for him. His checking got better and better as time went on I thought.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 24, 2009 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t. His stick is way too short to be an effective penalty killer.
by Sweet Monkey Action on Jul 24, 2009 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, he’s like the anti-Willie Mitchell.
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 24, 2009 5:33 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Wellwood would be useful as a slept-on forward in AV’s pocket come playoff time
(in case Grabner or CoHo find themselves gassed by the 3rd round) ,
but he’d likely demand a trade if he’s getting ice-time nicked by a young whippersnapper.
Pittsburgh and Detroit both had the ability to bring in some experienced help on the forward lines when the going got tough over the past two years. Just a thought.
Also, Jannik Hansen should likely move on, Raymond’s stolen his thunder.
Oh yeah, Hansen is buying a boat ticket.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 24, 2009 8:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Wellwood reminds me a bit of Cliff Ronning
Undersized, skilled, underestimated, gets the job done.
Personally, I think they need Wellwood on the team. Wait for the season if you’re going to trade someone, ship the dead wood (not a pun) out in November.
In 1985, Wellwood’s an 80 point guy. Bank on it.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 25, 2009 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions
So you’re saying trapping on goalie equipment turns 70-80 point players into 30 points players? That means it must turn 100 point players into 50 point players. So you do think Pavol Demitra is still a superstar! Got it.
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 25, 2009 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions
OK OK, your math is funny as is mine. Wellwood in an increased role with more minutes in say, 1985 would be an 80 point guy. My opinion. Today, Gretzky in his prime would get 100-120 points. Ovechkin in ‘85 would challenge Gretzky’s scoring records. Admit it.
I may be over-rating Woody but that’s my opinion. He has the skills.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 25, 2009 4:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Gretzky and Lemieux were superior playmakers to Ovechkin. Ovechkin is a superior sniper. I don’t think Ovie would have reached the Gretzky-only 200 point plateau, but I could see him getting 80 goals and 150 points in a season back then. But imagine if Gretzky in the 1980s was conditioned and developed like a player is today. And then he played against all the other 1980s players. How many points would he get then?
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 25, 2009 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Then he would be Crosby or Ovechkin :)
I have to disagree with you in general, except that Gretzky was a superior playmaker. Even if he conditioned differently today it wouldn’t matter. You can’t deny the trapping and bigger goalie equipment PLUS more blocked shots.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 25, 2009 6:47 PM PDT up reply actions
That sounds about right but I would need to see players with comparable salaries. 1.4 may be too high…
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 25, 2009 12:33 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Mr. Inaccurate is saying the Canucks have been very aggressive about Phil Kessel over the past 48 hours. I actually think Kessel makes a lot of sense on the Canucks, he fills that second line spot way better than sundin (kesler plays better with speed on his line). A 22 year old 36 goal scorer sounds very nice to me. And Kessel plays centre and wing, just like Kesler, although Kessel is not so great at faceoffs. We can’t afford him in the long term I would imagine, but as Chicago seems to think, that’s a future problem to be dealt with.
Anyway, how does this sound, if Boston would take it:
Schneider, Wellwood, draft pick. Or even Grabner in on that instead of Schneider since Boston already has a ‘goalie of the future’ (but Schneider being a Boston College kid and a local suggests to me he would be a popular acquisition in Bruinsville). I know some people don’t want to trade Grabner before he has his chance because he’s a pure goal scorer or what have you, but so is Kessel, and they’re about the same age. Kessel already has a 36 goal season under his belt from last year, what has Grabner done? No Canuck got more than 31 goals that same season.
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 25, 2009 4:26 PM PDT reply actions
Kessel is demanding at least $4 million right now isn’t he? Even with your trade proposals that would put us very close to the cap, unless you take out Demitra’s knee’s with a Louisville Slugger.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 25, 2009 4:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Not saying I wouldn’t want Kessel though, because oh hell yeah I would. Eklund is full of shit on this one…. as usual.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 25, 2009 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah true he is asking too much for what space we have left. But he would be great in that number 2 line don’t you think?
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 25, 2009 5:39 PM PDT up reply actions
In the same article in the Province today about Hossa having a rotator cuff injury which will prevent him from playing until Nov., was a mention of Kessel having a similar rotator cuff problem requiring 6 months of recuperation. Given that his operation occurred in May, he should also be ready to resume playing in Nov.
by Bobby Canuck on Jul 26, 2009 7:17 PM PDT up reply actions
May 22, 2009
The Boston Globe is reporting that Phil Kessel is not likely to be ready for the beginning of next season after undergoing surgery to repair a torn rotator cuff.
Our View:Recovery and rehab are expected take take anywhere from 4-6 months, and the team does not want to rush him back and injure his shoulder again. Expect him to be fine next season, but don’t expect him to play for the first few weeks.
Bah! What’s a torn rotator cuff? Just keep your arms down and drug up! heh
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 26, 2009 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions
I really think giving up on grabner before he plays a single NHL game, much less a season, is a bad idea. Maybe at the deadline but not yet, we should see what camp he has and where he falls on the roster
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 26, 2009 8:46 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
To me, it wouldn’t matter so much if the right trade were to happen. If the Canucks are “going hard for the Cup” and a guy like Kessel becomes available, I think a guy like Grabner is worth sacrificing. If we were in rebuild mode, then no way Grabner goes anywhere.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 26, 2009 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions
Since I’m pretty new at Canuck blogging (I’m mostly into American politics re blogging) how accurate is this Eklund? What sort of reputation does he have? I’d love to have Kessel in the lineup—anyone who can score goals, for that matter.
He’s about as useful as drawing the names of all NHL players out of a hat to determine who the Canucks will get next.
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 25, 2009 6:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Thanks, Beantown Canuck. A natural scorer for the 2nd line is what I desire most, this pre-season.
by Bobby Canuck on Jul 25, 2009 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Bobby, check this out. 2.3% accuracy. Even a hat is more accurate than that!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 25, 2009 6:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Eklund’s the fraud, gives bloggers a bad name overall but was smart enough to associate his name with some quality msm guys. That’s why he gets so much press, but I think he himself is a laughing stock, done much on his own from his sportsnet tradeline appearance two years ago
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 26, 2009 8:49 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Damnit, I don’t want Kessel, I want Lucic… If you’re going with pointless Boston rumors at least give me one that would be amazing.
Lucic is awesome too of course. But Boston would never ever trade him. He’s without a doubt the most popular player amongst the fans. But you have such high standards- when was the last tome the Canucks had a 22 year old who scored 36 goals in a season? Not since Bure. I would certainly put kessel in the amazing to get category.
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 25, 2009 8:20 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Krsm: I dunno….Kessel had more points in the season and playoffs. He’s not as nasty.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 25, 2009 8:44 PM PDT up reply actions
I can't imagine...
…what Vancouver has that would bring Kessel. How would Boston improve their team with what Vancouver has to offer? Taking a shot on Schneider, perhaps. Taking a shot on Grabner, perhaps. But that’s the same issue that trading for draft picks gives you: dealing away certainty for ?
Unless Boston thinks Kessel’s done as good as he ever will, then there’s no real reason to trade him. Besides, who’s going to take his place if he goes? Can’t say this makes a whole lot of sense for them. Looks like Eklund’s typical “dartboard” approach to predictions.
The reason to trade him is that Boston has only $2 million cap space left, and Kessel is an RFA who clearly commands more than that. So either they have to trade him or trade someone else or do waive some hefty salaries.
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 27, 2009 8:50 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, I read Kessel wants $4 million per. This still makes me question the Morris acquisition though…
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 27, 2009 8:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Ward was moved for Morris. They’re similar players defensively I think, but Morris has a slightly better offensive upgrade which they must have felt they were lacking.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 27, 2009 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, actually, now looking at the Bruins’ scoring from their defencemen last season only Chara and Wideman really produced. That’s not enough.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 27, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Have you had a look at morris’s stats in recent years? Where is this offence you speak of.
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 27, 2009 3:17 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Slightly better sir. He’s nothing special, but when you’re looking for more offensive punch, he’s better than Ward. And his recent years have been cemented in Phoenix so you should expect worse numbers. He’ll be better in Boston.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 27, 2009 3:55 PM PDT up reply actions
He may not be much better in Boston…but he does put out more than Ward for sure.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 27, 2009 5:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Well he’ll be on a stronger team so that has to help, far more than anchoring the Coyotes or Rangers.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 27, 2009 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Morris…passes to Savard….he scores!
Yeah, I see your point
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 27, 2009 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Hey!
The Canes are going to buy out Frantisek Kaberle’s contract this week. Maybe we can get a Kaberle afterall! haha
Was that goal a game winner? GOLD! :)
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 26, 2009 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions
i’d rather get Seidenberg if the numbers made sense (which most assuredly they won’t). sigh.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 27, 2009 4:05 AM PDT up reply actions
absolutely. It appears that Babchuk (my choice) cannot be trusted however. He may get the money from the KHL.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 27, 2009 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions

by 





















