Team-By-Team Spending (10/27/2010)

 As free agency approaches, now would be a good time to analyze how teams are currently constructed. This analysis will only illustrate where the teams have currently invested their cash, and is based on contract values that are currently listed on the league site. Players who are restricted free agents are very likely to receive at least a modest raise, but it would not be realistic to try to predict what they may be. Here is a look at how teams have spent their money to date. This analysis is based on activated players up to Tuesday, October 26. The players considered are not necessarily the ones listed on the NsHL rosters, but are the 12 forwards with the highest OV, the 6 defensemen with the highest OV, and the 2 goalies with the highest OV. While this is not the most accurate way to determine the team ratings, it is the most statistically defensible. While teams may intend on using players with a lower OV to start the season, performance may mean they bring in another player – it is most likely the player with the highest OV. The most likely call-up in the event of injury is also the player with the highest OV.

The GMs in this league are an intelligent bunch, and to suggest that the highest OV makes for the most valuable player is laughable, but keeping in mind that some of these players have a high OV because of weak attributes and strong experience or leadership skills, and other players are the exact opposite, this does give a fairly accurate sense of where teams are currently at. Of course, there are always exceptions. For example, last season Calgary would have sat near the bottom of the league in virtually every category, yet they had an outstanding season. They started strong then made several changes during the season that kept the momentum going. The lists below do not suggest which teams will do well and which will not. They simply show in which areas the NsHL clubs have invested their money, and what that has bought them.

#1 Dallas $58.4 million
$29.7 (#8) on Forwards (50.9%) for an OV of 67.17 (#3)
$26.25 (#1) on Defense (44.9%) for an OV of 67.17 (#3 T)
$2.45 (#28) on Goalies (4.2%) for an OV of 68.5 (#9)
 

#2 NY Rangers $57.64 million
$35.5 (#3) on Forwards (61.6%) for an OV of 65.75 (#12)
$16.35 (#7) on Defense (28.4%) for an OV of 65.5 (#13 T)
$5.8 (#9 T) on Goalies (9.0 %) for an OV of 70.5 (#1)
 

#3 Vancouver $56.25 million
$35.9 (#1) on Forwards (63.8%) for an OV of 67.58 (#1)
$15.25 (#11) on Defense (27.1%) for an OV of 67.83 (#2)
$5.1 (#16) on Goalies (9.1%) for an OV of 68.5 (#9 T)
 

#4 Washington $54.95 million
$27.5 (#15) on Forwards (50%) for an OV of 66.67 (#5)
$23.4 (#2) on Defense (42.6%) for an OV of 68.17 (#1)
$4.05 (#22) on Goalies (7.4%) for an OV of 66.5 (#23 T)
 

#5 Ottawa $54.08 million
$31.33 (#4) on Forwards (57.9%) for an OV of 66 (#10)
$19.35 (#4) on Defense (35.8%) for an OV of 65.5 (#13 T)
$3.4 (#25) on Goalies (6.3%) for an OV of 67 (#18 T)
 

#6 Detroit $54 million
$35.73 (#2) on Forwards (66.2%) for an OV of 66.17 (#6 T)
$12.98 (#16) on Defense (24%) for an OV of 65.17 (#16)
$5.3 (#13) on Goalies (9.8%) for an OV of 68.5 (#9 T)
 

#7 St Louis $51.11 million
$25.83 (#20) on Forwards (50.5%) for an OV of 65.92 (#11)
$16.54 (#6) on Defense (32.4%) for an OV of 65 (#17)
$8.75 (#1) on Goalies (17.1%) for an OV of 69 (#7 T)
 

#8 Buffalo $49.88 million
$31.15 (#7) on Forwards (62.4%) for an OV of 66.08 (#8 T)
$16.23 (#8) on Defense (32.5%) for an OV of 67.17 (#3 T)
$2.5 (#28) on Goalies (5.1%) for an OV of 66.5 (#23 T)
 

#9 Colorado $49.2 million
$32.33 (#4) on Forwards (65.6%) for an OV of 67.25 (#2)
$11.28 (#20) on Defense (22.9%) for an OV of 65.67 (#12)
$5.6 (#11) on Goalies (11.5%) for an OV of 68.5 (#9 T)
 

#10 Chicago $47.93 million
$31.33 (#6) on Forwards (65.5%) for an OV of 64.83 (#22 T)
$9.1 (#25) on Defense (18.9%) for an OV of 64.67 (#18 T)
$7.5 (#3) on Goalies (15.6%) for an OV of 67 (#18 T)
 

#11 Phoenix $47.73 million
$22.7 (#26) on Forwards (47.6%) for an OV of 64.08 (#24)
$19.25 (#3) on Defense (40.3%) for an OV of 64.17 (#22)
$5.6 (#12) on Goalies (12.1%) for an OV of 66 (#27 T)
 

#12 Atlanta $47.52 million
$28.84 (#11) on Forwards (60.7%) for an OV of 63.83 (#27)
$12.88 (#17) on Defense (27.1%) for an OV of 66 (#10 T)
$5.8 (#9 T) on Goalies (12.2%) for an OV of 70 (#2 T)
 

#13 Anaheim $47.52 million
$26.17 (#19) on Forwards (55.2%) for an OV of 65.58 (#15 T)
$17.4 (#5) on Defense (36.7%) for an OV of 66.17 (#8 T)
$3.85 (#23) on Goalies (8.1%) for an OV of 69 (#7 T)
 

#14 Columbus $47.38 million
$27.75 (#14) on Forwards (58.6%) for an OV of 63.75 (#28)
$14.63 (#13) on Defense (30.9%) for an OV of 63.5 (#24)
$5 (#17) on Goalies (10.5%) for an OV of 68.5 (#9 T)
 

#15 Los Angeles $47.25 million
$26.4 (#17) on Forwards (55.9%) for an OV of 66.83 (#4)
$13.9 (#14) on Defense (29.4%) for an OV of 65.5 (#13 T)
$6.95 (#5) on Goalies (14.7%) for an OV of 70 (#2 T)
 

#16 Minnesota $46.72 million
$26.18 (#18) on Forwards (56%) for an OV of 66.08 (#8 T)
$15.34 (#10) on Defense (32.8%) for an OV of 66.17 (#8 T)
$5.2 (#14 T) on Goalies (11.2%) for an OV of 68.5 (#9 T)
 

#17 New Jersey $45.92 million
$28.95 (#10) on Forwards (63%) for an OV of 65.5 (#18 T)
$9.77 (#24) on Defense (21%) for an OV of 63.33 (#25)
$7.2 (#4) on Goalies (16%) for an OV of 67 (#18 T)
 

#18 Edmonton $45.38 million
$28.63 (#12) on Forwards (63.1%) for an OV of 65.5 (#18 T)
$10.5 (#22) on Defense (23.1%) for an OV of 61.83 (#29)
$6.25 (#7) on Goalies (13.8%) for an OV of 66.5 (#23 T)
 

#19 Toronto $44.56 million
$25.37 (#23) on Forwards (56.9%) for an OV of 65.33 (#20 T)
$13.04 (#15) on Defense (29.3%) for an OV of 66.5 (#6)
$6.15 (#8) on Goalies (13.8%) for an OV of 68.5 (#9 T)
 

#20 Montreal $44.28 million
$28.58 (#13) on Forwards (64.5%) for an OV of 65.33 (#20 T)
$12.75 (#18) on Defense (28.8%) for an OV of 66 (#10 T)
$2.95 (#27) on Goalies (6.7%) for an OV of 66.5 (#23 T)
 

#21 Pittsburgh $44.2 million
$29.05 (#9) on Forwards (65.7%) for an OV of 65.67 (#13 T)
$10.25 (#23) on Defense (23.2%) for an OV of 62.83 (#27)
$4.9 (#18) on Goalies (11.1%) for an OV of 67.5 (#16 T)
 

#22 Florida $41.51 million
$21.87 (#28) on Forwards (52.7%) for an OV of 63.92 (#25 T)
$14.84 (#12) on Defense (35.8%) for an OV of 64.33 (#20 T)
$4.8 (#19) on Goalies (11.5%) for an OV of 65.5 (#29 T)
 

#23 Philadelphia $41.11 million
$25.63 (#21) on Forwards (62.3%) for an OV of 65.67 (#13 T)
$11.66 (#19) on Defense (28.4%) for an OV of 66.83 (#5)
$3.83 (#24) on Goalies (9.3%) for an OV of 66 (#27 T)
 

#24 NY Islanders $39.74 million
$23.44 (#25) on Forwards (60%) for an OV of 65.08 (#15 T)
$11.1 (#21) on Defense (27.9%) for an OV of 66.33 (#7)
$5.2 (#14 T) on Goalies (13.1%) for an OV of 67 (#18 T)
 

#25 San Jose $36.55 million
$25.47 (#22) on Forwards (69.7%) for an OV of 63.92 (#25 T)
$6.33 (#30) on Defense (17.3%) for an OV of 63.17 (#26)
$3.2 (#26) on Goalies (9.5%) for an OV of 69.5 (#5 T)
 

#26 Boston $36.21 million
$20.46 (#29) on Forwards (56.5%) for an OV of 64.83 (#22 T)
$7.95 (#26) on Defense (22%) for an OV of 64 (#23)
$7.8 (#2) on Goalies (21.5%) for an OV of 69 (#16 T)
 

#27 Calgary $35.26 million
$26.43 (#16) on Forwards (75%) for an OV of 66.17 (#6 T)
$6.85 (#27) on Defense (19.4%) for an OV of 62.5 (#28)
$1.98 (#30) on Goalies (5.6%) for an OV of 68.5 (#9 T)
 

#28 Tampa Bay $33.53 million
$23.93 (#24) on Forwards (71.4%) for an OV of 65.58 (#15 T)
$6.4 (#29) on Defense (19.1%) for an OV of 60.5 (#30)
$3.2 (#26) on Goalies (9.5%) for an OV of 69.5 (#5 T)
 

#29 Carolina $33.31 million
$14.06 (#30) on Forwards (42.2%) for an OV of 60.75 (#30)
$12.65 (#18) on Defense (38%) for an OV of 64.67 (#18 T)
$6.6 (#6) on Goalies (19.8%) for an OV of 69.5 (#5 T)
 

#30 Nashville $33.27 million
$22.28 (#27) on Forwards (67%) for an OV of 64.17 (#29)
$6.63 (#28) on Defense (19.9%) for an OV of 64.33 (#20 T)
$4.6 (#21) on Goalies (13.1%) for an OV of 65.5 (#29 T)

Top 10 spenders include the top 8 spenders on forwards, as well as 15th (Washington), and 20th (St. Louis). Three of those teams are in the bottom half of spending on defense (Detroit 16th, Colorado 20th, and Chicago 25th). Only one team in the top 10 spenders on forwards is in the bottom 10 on overall spending (Pittsburgh 9th and 21st respectively).

Also of note is that only two teams spend less than 50% of their salaries on forwards (Carolina 42.2% and Phoenix 47.6%), though Dallas (50.9%), Washington (50%), and St. Louis (50.5%) come very close, while Calgary (75%) and Tampa (71.4%) are the only teams that spend more than 70% on forwards. Boston is the only team spending more than 20% on goalies (21.5%) and Dallas is the only team spending less than 5% (4.2%).

The best bang for their buck for forwards go to Los Angeles and Washington. Los Angeles ranks 17th in spending on forwards for the #4 rated group, while Washington spends the 15th most for the #5 rated group. Paying the 6th most for 22nd rated group of forwards probably puts Chicago in the category of getting the least for their money, which would explain why they have made some cost-cutting moves this off-season.

The best bang for their buck for defense goes to Philadelphia and the Islanders. The Flyers pay the 19th highest defense salaries for the 5th best rating, while the Islanders pay the 21st most for the 7th best rating. The team statistically getting the worst deal is probably Phoenix, who have the 3rd highest defense payroll for the 22nd rating.

Goal is the area where this survey is the least effective, as most teams have one top goalie, and a backup who plays very little, and a youngster can skew the numbers much more than in the other areas. For example, Calgary is likely getting steal playing the least for the 9th best goaltending, but they have Carey Price on an entry level contract. That’s not to take away any credit from the club, but it illustrates the flaws in this survey.

The thing to keep in mind is that numbers can be twisted to tell whatever story you like. The hope is that this will spark debate, or allow general managers to reflect on just where it is they have put their money, and perhaps where they may want to invest a buck or two during the free agency period. Happy hunting gentlemen... just remember to buy the players, not the numbers.

-Archimedes Newton for the Society for Canadian Hockey Research (Sachermetrics)