Off Wing Opinion: Money Talks:

I thought player agents were supposed to represent their clients’ interests, not their own.

Ask Dean Lombardi. The sharks have a long, painful and unpleasant history with Theofanus as a player agent. he’s just as annoying and greedy as Scott Boras is in baseball, but without the redeeming qualities.

At least you know what Boras is trying to do: make his client as much money as possible as soon as possible (even if it hoses his career long term, as it did with Todd Van Poppel, IMHO). theofanus seems primarily interested in what makes Theofanus the most money, not his client.

he’s not well remembered in San Jose, where he was Arturs Irbe’s agent (among a few others).

Off Wing Opinion: On Second Thought:

Even though Joe Thornton has been traded, nothing has changed in Boston. The Bruins are still struggling and the press continues to crucify the team.

On the other hand, in San Jose, it’s still Joe Freaking Thornton! and somehow, Boston convinced themselves that Thorton was the problem, and 29 other teams would have been more than happy to take that problem off their hands; San Jose actually DID.

Boston had major problems. Joe Thornton wasn’t one of them. Boston clearly felt that Thornton wasn’t the guy they wanted to be captain, and you just don’t make someone an ex-captain without moving him to a new team. Unlike moving Nolan to Toronto, Boston trading Thornton wasn’t trading away a failed captain — just trading away one that didn’t act like Boston wants their captain to act (whatever that is, but it seems to involve high emotion, lots of yelling, throwing guys into toilets and occasionally trashing a locker room, as far as I can tell. In other words, Trevor Linden not welcome….)

What boston doesn’t understand, I guess, is that while that kind of go-to “don’t you dare take a shift off” personality is important in the locker room, it doesn’t have to wear the C. It doesn’t have to be a captain at all; that kind of leader just, well, leads. And captains can lead in many ways — nobody will ever mistake Trevor Linden for Mark Messier, for instance, but both are very successful captains.

I expect that Thornton NOT being captain in San Jose will make him that much better, too. It’s one less thing to worry about — and it’s no insult to be on a team with Marleau as Captain, either. So I like the chemistry aspects here almost as much as the talent aspects.

I still remember when Dean Lombardi had his “chemistry rules” moment — when he brought in Ray Sheppard and Craig Janney to the team, which were combined an absolute disaster; and according to Dean, “on paper, it was a great trade”. Dean, to his benefit, put a lot of work into learning how to judge character, and ended up doing a good job. But now, it’s clear, Boston is clueless about it. I feel sorry for Marco Sturm; the other two guys won’t get boston expectations heaped on him the way Marco will, and now, it seems clear, the honeymoon over the trade in boston lasted about two games, and then the mediocre play, bad chemistry and losing started again…

We’re about a third of the the way through the season, so I think it’s time to ask how the rule changes are working…

And frankly, I like them. But they’re not perfect.

Here’s what I’d change for next season.

First, the schedule. I hate it.

Here are two alternatives:

new schedule A:

play the other conference home and home: 15 teams x 2 = 30
play everyone in your conference home and home: 14 teams x 2 = 28 (58)
play everyone in your division 2 sets of home and home: 4 teams x 4 = 16 (74)
rotate the last six games around your divisional teams, focusing on rivalries. or cut the schedule a bit. I’m easy.

In this schedule, everyone sees every team once, with a strong focus on divisional play after that.

new schedule B:

play the other

play the other conference 1 game per season, switching venues (each team visits the other every other season)
15 x 1 = 15
play everyone in your conference 4 times (14×4 = 36, for 51 games)
play everyone in your division 6 times (4×6 = 24, for 75 games)
then either cut the schedule, or fill in with divisional rivalries.

Personally, I prefer plan B. I’d LOVE to get every team into every building, but with 80 games and 30 teams, in practice, it’s tough. But we can get them in every other year, and still focus on divisional rivalries.

In this schedule, the Sharks would play Philly once, Calgary 4 times, anaheim 10 times. If anaheim is your rival, it might be 12 times, and I have no problem with a 77 game season.

Next rule change:

protect the goaltender. But not TOO much. players crashing the goalie is a bigger problem this year. My suggestion: bring back the half-moon crease, maybe extend it a bit. If you touch a goalie in the crease, it’s goaltender interference. If the goalie is outside of the paint, it’s not. Pure and simple. If the goalie wants to leave the crease to challenge, then he’s going to have to accept some contact. If he stays in the crease, players have to leave him alone.

Next rule change:

Do away with the “no touch” zones for the goalies. While I supported that change at the start of the season, I think goalies have for the most part adjusted already, adn they don’t really have that big an impact compared to the rest of the changes. What they end up being, then, are not useful restrictions on goalies but an artificial obstacle course for them — and that’s not what this game’s about. so nuke them.

Referees continue to need to work on what’s legitimate physical play and what’s a penalty, especially in the slot, but this needs refinement, not changing. And 30 games into the season, I think they’re mostly getting it right — and I certainly don’t want to go back to the days we had. There are some players who simply can’t play the new rules — and while they hate the changes, what the league needs is to replace them with players who can.

Other than these tweaks: LEAVE IT ALONE. I like it.

or the Joe! Freaking! Thornton! era continues.

Sooner or later, the sharks are going to lose a game. Sooner or later they’re going to ONLY score three goals on a team. It just doesn’t look like it’s going to happen any time soon.

Last night, against a tired Florida team, the Sharks played their weakest period yet in the “Joe” era, opening the game with only five shots but ending the period 1-1. Florida, which had played the night before in Dallas (and lost a heartbreaker), didn’t arrive in San Jose until 7 in the morning because of weather delays out of Dallas, but they made things tough for the Sharks early. In the second, the Sharks started rolling, Mark Smith (Mark SMITH?) scoring two goals (for the first time in his career) and never looked back. AFter that point, the game wasn’t even close, although a horribly soft goal by Nabokov from Stumpel made the score a bit less lopsided.

Nabokov’s found his game, and looks solid. He got called for a brain cramp (um, playing a puck in the no-touch zone) after the puck bounced over his stick and he reacted.

Kid notes:

Stevenson got another goal, in somewhat limited minutes. Doug Murray only had one really significant hit last night, on Gratton, but it took off Gratton’s helmet (with a bit of an elbow, I think, but it seemed as if the arm was put up defensively, not thrown into Gratton’s face when Gratton initiated the hit). Gratton came back to try again, and I’ll call that second round a draw. What I keep noticing about Murray is he’s on the ice for goals: three of the six last night. He’s not generating points, but the team is scoring when he’s taking a shift regularly.

Ref notes:

refs were Kimmerly and Sutherland, and they did a solid job. I felt the goaltender inteference call in the first was a bit weak, but the refs have been told to protect the goalies; Kimmerly called an unsportsmanlike on Scott Thornton after he chirped on a call, but I’ll cut him some slack, because he took a puck to the face as he was blowing the whistle, and it clearly stung and I think Thornton should have realized it was a bad time to argue — but I thought what he said (we were in lipreading range) didn’t justify it.

I was tied up moving plaidworks to the new server when the thornton trade went down. Just BEFORE it happened, I was going to post that the Sharks needed to do something, and try to get a top-6 forward (preferably center) to bolster the team.

I certainly wasn’t thinking about Joe Thornton. Which is why Doug Wilson is the Sharks GM, and I’m sitting on a blog suggesting we need someone like, oh, like a Scott Thornton. (By the way, I just want to note that Trent Klatt is still not playing hockey, and while he might need some time in Cleveland to get in game shape, his fight with the union notwithstanding — he’s someone who might improve the sharks and bring some of the spark we’re missing with Scott Parker on the IR again. Not in the fighting sense, but in the lead-by-example form.

Anyway, there’s only one way to describe my reaction to the Thornton trade. It is, of course, to channel the ghost of Joe Piscopo‘s The Sports Guy:

TSG: HOCKEY!

TSG: TRADE!

TSG: REALLY BIG TRADE!

TSG: SHARKS!

TSG: JOE FREAKING THORNTON!

TSG: BRUINS!

TSG: COMPROMISING PHOTOS?

TSG: JOE FREAKING THORNTON!

To be honest, the Sharks gave up a lot — Marco Sturm is a great player and Brad Stuart while he hasn’t been the same since his head injury, still has a upside and even the way he plays today is a top four defenseman, and Wayne Primeau is one of those lunchpail guys that teams need and which will give them a lift by playing quality minutes and bringing a good work ethic and attitude with him. This trade works nicely for Boston is Stuart and life his game up a level, closer to what he was expected to be as a kid, and I think that’s very possible.

On the other hand, this is a no brainer for San Jose. None of the guys the Sharks gave up make the players around him better. Stuart is replaceable, Primeau is easily replaceable, and Thornton is, well, a lot better than Sturm — and he makes everyone on the team better.

So, wow. It’s a gutsy trade by the Sharks, giving up three roster talents (beyond that, two top talents and a solid contributor, not minor leaguers, not draft picks, not fill ins. that’s significant depth to lose) — but it’s a no brainer. o it in a second, without quesiton. I’d give up MORE to get Thornton (anyone want Nils Ekman? cheap?) — which makes me wonder what Boston was thinking? To me, the best they can hope for here is to minimize the PR disaster in the making.

As cousin Scott Thornton noted “what team wouldn’t want Joe Thornton?” — um, Boston. 29 other teams, on the other hand, would have been happy to take him off their hands, but the Sharks made it happen. The Bruins are going to regret this…

for other coverage of the trade, try these links:

Sharkspage (and again)

Kukla’s Corner

And the trade is a big part of Carnival of the NHL 14, brought to you this time by Hockeydirt. A great read…

Sharkspage – San Jose Sharks, Hockey, NHL sports blog:

Ken Campbell of the Toronto Star suggests that Patrick Marleau may be the next San Jose Shark on the trade block…

Well connected NHL executive or not, this trade would make no sense. After trading Marco Sturm [tied for the San Jose Sharks scoring lead in 2002-03] and Brad Stuart [the Sharks leading scorer on the blueline],

My thought is that the Marleau rumors are based on explorations Wilson was making before the Thornton trade went down. Once Joe Thornton was snagged, that one died. That doesn’t mean the Sharks were necessarily serious about trading Marleau, but it seems clear that all options were on the table to fix the team.

I still think that the Sharks aren’t done. I keep wondering whether we’re going to see a goalie moved, although Nabokov tweaking his groin makes that problematic right now — if they ever have all the goalies healthy, there are teams that seem to need a goalie, and the Sharks can take advantage of that.

However, I also keep asking myself — is there a trade available that includes swapping Nabokov and Luongo? Not straight up, but as part of a larger deal? I wonder what it would take…. On the other hand, the last couple of games have made me a lot more comfortable here again, and if Toskala is really healthy…

One thing Laurie and I keep wondering — why are the Sharks seemingly so insistent about NOT playing Schaeffer? We don’t get it. People I’ve talked to at the Tank tell me he’s a real NHL-caliber goalie, maybe a bit green. The problem some of us have is that both Nabokov and Toskala are quite solid and smooth goalies on their technique and angles, where Schaeffer is more of a reaction/scramble guy, and so he just looks — out of control. I’ve muttered more than once about the return of Irbe, and Schaeffer’s occasional braincramps puck handling haven’t helped stir up those ghosts… But people who’s opinion I trust say he really is the real thing… So I wonder if Schaeffer will ever see Cleveland again…

If the Sharks make another move, I’d expect it to be a defenseman. I don’t think the Sharks defense is in as tough a shape as many fans, and right now, I wouldn’t mind standing pat. Yes, Hannan’s struggled, and Stuart is gone (and wasn’t what he should have been — and hasn’t been since the head injury) — but from what I’ve seen, most of the Sharks “problems on defense” is the defense attempting to make up for defensive lapses by the forwards, and the Sharks were having trouble getting three lines that could be consistent and reliable every game. Joe Thornton changes all of that.

On top of that, the Sharks have a player few folks are thinking of: Dougie Murray. He’s up with the team now, but he was, from what I heard in training camp, expected to make the team — and got hurt in the first week of camp. So now, he’s healthy and stepping in, and I’d expect will fill some of the gap people are looking Wilson to run a trade for, and Joe Thornton will fix the rest by reducing the number of problems the forwards cause that the defense gets blamed for.

(Some of the folks who organized the next generation Sharks list decided to schedule a get-together, and declared it a wake for the old list. I see it differently, but a chance to spend face time with these people is always welcome. It is on 12/19, FWIW, and if you want info on joining in, drop me email

But anyway — Dennis Leach is a name well known to Sharks fans, since until this season, he was one of the primary anthem singers in San Jose Arena — and his voice is much missed this year, at least by some of us.

And Dennis did what he does best — when he heard of the wake, he broke out in song. And I just had to share it with you….)

With apologies to Padraig Murphy…..

1. Oh, The day that Sharks at Plaidworks died I never will forget.
We all got stinkin’ drunk that night and some ain’t sober yet.
Well, the only thing we did that night that caused us any shame,
We sat her upright in the box and dealt her in the game.

Chorus
Oh, that is the way we buried Sharks at Plaidworks.
That’s how we lost our honor and our pride.
That is the way we buried Sharks at Plaidworks
On the night that Sharks at Plaidworks died.

2. Oh, the night that Sharks at Plaidworks died I never will forget.
We all got stinkin’ drunk that night and some ain’t sober yet.
Well, the only thing we did that night that caused us any fear,
We took the ice right off the corpse and put it in our beer.

Chorus

3. Oh, the night that Sharks at Plaidworks died I never will forget.
We all got stinkin’ drunk that night and some ain’t sober yet.
Well, the only thing we did that night that made our hearts to sigh,
We took the foam atop our pints and “phhoophed” her in the eye.

Chorus

4. Oh, the night that Sharks at Plaidworks died I never will forget.
We all got stinkin’ drunk that night and some ain’t sober yet.
Well, the only thing we did that night that gave us any hope,
We Sainted Chuq and Laurie then we lowered them a rope.

Oh, that is the way we buried Sharks at Plaidworks.
That’s how we lost our honor and our pride.
That is the way we buried Sharks at Plaidworks
On the night that Sharks at Plaidworks died.

Now, that was a fun game. I am really loving the NHL this year, except for this “sharks lose again” part. But at least they’re making it interesting. This team was fired up, ready, played hard, played well. Mostly.

The key exceptions that stood out: nabokov. something’s wrong. period. He’s not seeing the long rising shot, or he’s not reacting to it, or something. Beyond that, there are times when he seems to stop and ends up watching a goal go in — brain cramp? second guessing? worried about injuring his shoulder again? shoulder still hurt? I don’t know, but there’s always times during games where he simply seems to zone out and bad things happen, soft goals, or simply a slow reaction (or no reaction at all). He seems tentative. the rest of the time, he looks increasingly good, don’t get me wrong, but there are these lapses/gaps.

Stevenson/sturm/goc

Stevenson/sturm/goc

Stevenson/sturm/goc

Ekman/Thornton/McCauley

What’s this? the forwards on the ice for the regular strength goals. See a trend here?

A lot of people seem to be talking about “lack of veteran leadership”, which is code for — hell, I don’t know, either. “something’s wrong and I can’t say what it is, so we’ll blame something really vague”, I guess. Even Barry Melrose has hauled that one out.

To me, the problem isn’t leadership. It might be depth at forward. we definitely have issues in goal (why aren’t we playing Schaeffer? there seems to be some feeling that if they can’t “fix” nabokov, it doesn’t matter, maybe? — there clearly seems to be a feeling that Schaeffer started hot, but isn’t (yet?) the long-term answer).

But at center? Marleau (the captain) — point a game, won 60% of his faceoffs (McCauley was better).

Goc won 35%.

This is why I don’t see it as veteran leadership. Veteran leadership won’t keep Nabokov from a softie (or two) a game, or merely letting in a decent shot he should have had. Veteran leadership won’t deal with the fact that we have one great line (Marleau’s) and one decent line, and we’re struggling at forward after that. Goc, Michalek, Thornton, Ekman. Stevenson’s up here because they’re looking for someone who can get the job done up here — and last night, he was on ice for three goals. I like what I see — but the red wings just ate that line alive last night.

Ekman’s been a huge disappointment. Goc, Michalek are showing youthful inconsistency.

Do we need to shake things up? I acn buy into that — find a good veteran forward. But do it because our forward depth just isn’t good enough, not because we need veteran leadership. WE have kids trying to grow into roles that are showing they aren’t quite up to it, and one guy (ekman) who doesn’t deserve a roster spot, and a couple of other guys (thornton and McAuley) who were in that same doghouse, but are finally playing their way out.

So I don’t see a leadership issue. I see an issue of consistent execution. Part of that is we have kids being asked to do too much, and part of that is we have passengers watching; Nabokov at times, and Ekman. So go find a top 9 forward and bring him in. Give him Ekman’s roster spot, let Ekman go annoy someone other than me for a while. But do it becaues we realize the forwards can’t get the job done, not some “veteran leadership” thing.

James Mirtle: The Bertuzzi incident and Mr. Laraque – A hockey journalist’s blog:

Now, in the wake of an ugly incident between the Edmonton Oilers’ Georges Laraque and Los Angeles Kings’ Sean Avery, the Bertuzzi incident is being brought up as something that deterred possible on-ice violence.

Laraque said he considered going after Avery on the ice after the alleged slur but, in the wake of the Todd Bertuzzi situation with Steve Moore, decided to let the NHL deal with it. Laraque talked to Oilers GM Kevin Lowe and NHL chief of operations Colin Campbell about the incident.

good, if true. The tendency of players to “take things into their own hands” (i.e., vigilante ‘justice’ usually based on some unwritten ‘code’ that varies based on who’s pissed off about what and how much they’re paid) is one of the key things limit the NHL from being more interesting to a mainstream sports audience.

It’s actually tied up into so many things — the league tolerance of fighting, but also, the league’s willingness to “let the boys play” and “not deciding the game” (code for: you can win the game not by being better, but by being willing to play dirtier), by the third period whistle-swallow, by not calling penalties during power plays — the list goes on.

If the referees called the rules, and if there were strong penalties for transgressing those rules, and those rules were reliably enforced and consistently applied, the role of “policeman” goes away. Scott Parker is a Shark not because Brad Stuart got mugged and seriously injured — but because the league didn’t deal with the mugging in any serious way.

I’m not anti-fighting, but I recognize that fighting gives the mass media easy video clips for the 11PM news, and a legitimate reason to not take hockey seriously — fights break out in football and basketball, and sissyfights in baseball — but only in hockey are they accepted as part of the game, and fighters given hero status well beyond their skill level (don’t believe me? sit in san jose arena any time Scott Parker has his jersey off — the crowd appreciates that on more than one level)

But fighting also is an indicator of worse problems — the biggest being hat the league has bought into the idea that the referee isn’t actually in charge of the game. He was supposed to “let the boys play” and “not decide the game” (HUH?), which really means don’t call penalties that actually happen. Um, think about that for a minute. To borrow from a famous philosopher, “no action is still an action”. Choosing to NOT call a penalty still is deciding the game, you simply change the bias towards the person who gets away with the infraction — and if you want to know how the NHL into the sad state of hockey it had before the lockout, that’s how: by buying into stupid idea that swallowing the whistle somehow made the game better. In fact, it encouraged dirty play, waterskiing defensemen, thugging in the slot and the whole grab/pin/hogtie routine — because if you know you can break the rules and get away with it, you will, because it gives you an advantage.

So now, the league’s reset the rules back to where they want to pretend they always were — and they need to have the backbone to do so — and if they do, then yes, as James says, it’s a new NHL, and policemen and fighting will fade away. But if the refs start swallowing the whistle again when the whiners start whining (Hello, chris chelios to the white discourtesy phone, please) about penalties at key moments, then you’ll see a return to ugly hockey and fighting.

If the league does ITS job, teams have no need for enforcers. I wish I really believed the league understood this. So far, I’m encouraged — but only time will tell. But I’ve seen a good number of penalty shots and 5on3 sitautions already this season, and that, to me, indicates they really have told the refs to stop calling games sitautionally. Here’s hoping it continues.

Tomorrow is opening night for the NHL — and I’m thrilled to see it back and in operation. I have great hope for the changes they’ve made.

It’s really hard to handicap this season, given the changes, how teams will react, and how the time off will affect players (some will get better from the time off; others just older).

But right now, I really like the Sharks and Senators. I’ll make those my choices for the Stanley Cup.

Game on! drop the damn puck already.

The Chronicle Journal – National:

Flames defenceman Denis Gauthier is getting knocked for his hitting style

Avery’s comments, which appeared on TSN’s website, came in response to Phoenix Coyotes defenceman Denis Gauthier’s hit on Jeremy Roenick in a Sunday pre-season game that left the Kings star with a concussion..
“I think it was a clean hit,” Avery told TSN. “I think it was typical of most French guys in our league with a visor on, running around and playing tough and not back anything up.”

Roenick, who was livid with Gauthier after the game, suffered the 11th documented concussion of his career as a result of the clean hit that Gauthier delivered during the second period.

Okay, let me get this straight. If I can.

Jeremy Roenick, one of the more physical players in the league, and a guy with a history of concussions to boot, gets whacked by Denis Gauthier in a clean hit in the middle of a real hockey game (if it were a fake hockey game, fans wouldn’t be paying full price to see it, right? That is what fans pay to see exhibition,um, pre-season games).

Roenick has his head down. This is somehow Gauthier’s fault, because he’s transcended some unwritten rule, one that seems to indicate that it’s okay for guys like Roenick to hit players in the preseason, but nobody’s allowed to hit him. Because Roenick is, um…

Old? Sorry, a veteran.

Because it’s okay to skate with your head down in pre-season, because it doesn’t count?

Because the league outlawed body checks in pre-season and didn’t tell the fans? (well, from what I’ve seen, that’s mostly true, but ignore that)

Because – Roenick is stupid? Because Roenick should know better than to ever let his head down on an ice sheet, pre-season or not, because he’s risking the final concussion of his career even by accidental contact?

Because Roenick has never heard of a player on an opposing team needing to make an impression with his coaches in a pre-season game? Because Roenick doesn’t see that a good, clean, aggressive body check is the kind of play a bubble player needs to convince coaches to keep him out of the AHL?

Gee, in Roenick’s world (where contracts are large and roster spots are guaranteed), maybe that makes sense. But to therefore assume everyone else has to play by his personal rules? No wonder he has lots of concussions. Smart people never put their heads down. Roenick must be a slow learner — his response is to blame everyone else, not himself.

Jeremy, if this was a nasty hit? I’d be on your side. I hate concussions in hockey. We’ve lost too many good players to them already. But the first lesson a hockey player should learn when he’s caught with his head down is to NEVER LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN. Not to complain about it.

And to assume pre-season games are no-hit games is stupid. They’re bad enough with the low-hit ratio we’ve seen, but to amgically create some no-hit rule. That’s not Gauthier’s fault. I don’t for a second blame anyone for actually trying to spark up some action. Some of these pre-season games are as bad as the All-Star game.

And then there’s Steve Avery, who seems to be trying to become the next Brett Hull, only without the childish charm. Maybe Steve ought to go ask his teammate, Luc Robitaille, what he thinks of his quote. I’ll bet there’s some fun in the locker room in Los Angeles.

Avery was one of the players who spoke out during the lockout, with his “brainwashed” comment. If he alienates many more of his fellow NHLPA brothers, he’s liable to start having to eat alone on the road. He probably needs to start carrying two pairs of shoes, too — one to wear, one for the shaving cream. He’ll be lucky if that’s all he gets.

One has to ask: if things are already this — spirited — in the King’s locker room, are they going to be able to pull it together and play, or is this going to be a year of chemistry and quagmire for the Kings?

I feel for Andy Murray. But not for Roenick. And Avery needs to learn to engage his brain before his mouth. But he probably won’t. Here’s hoping the team doesn’t pay for it….

Off Wing Opinion: Capitals Notebook:

Funny, but that sounds a lot like what you might expect to hear from the head coach of an NFL team justifying the release of a popular veteran player. Lou was over a barrel and he knew it. Guess Caps GM George McPhee was simply making the best offer. That Lamoriello waited this long to deal Friesen was probably because he wanted to hold out for the best deal possible.

And that pretty much sums up Jeff Friesen. Drafted 11th overall to some controversy over placing. Friesen became a fan favorite in San Jose for his work ethic and intensity, and his almost too-honest public comments about himself; nobody was a bigger critic of Friesen than he was.

Unfortunately? I think he was drafted too high — his career in the NHL is fine by any standard, except for someone drafted in the top third of the first round. So in San Jose, there was a feeling he never quite lived up to his potential (I think he did; I think he never lived up to his draft position). With his salary to some degree driven by being a high first rounder, he’s one of those players that (a) ultimately seem to be available, (b) end up being traded to a team that sees his upside, and (c) once he gets to his new team, they found out that Jeff Friesen is — Jeff Friesen. Which is pretty good, but Friesen makes people believe he’s capable of more; after all, there aren’t many people in the league that outwork him.

And so Friesen seems to be one of those players that moves around — good enough that people want to trade for him, not good enough that they end up feeling the need to keep him. His value as a trade asset is higher than his value on the roster; especially now, where some teams have more salary flexibility than others.

That may well turn into how Friesen is remembered around the league. A good player by any definition — but left iwth a general feeling that he should have been even better.

One can only wonder what his career might have been if he’d been drafted in the bottom third of the first round (a more appropriate place for him, IMHO) — and the changed expectations that would have brought. (for another example of this problem, take a look at Radek Bonk).