The Capitals At The All-Star Break: A Roundtable Discussion

One of the nice fringe benefits of blogging is making new friends. And over the course of this season especially, I've been very lucky to get to know a bunch of folks who love their hockey and follow the Washington Capitals.

Now that we're in the midst of the All-Star break, I figured it would be a good time to step back and review how the team has progressed so far this season with my new pals. What follows is a transcript of an online conversation I moderated with Japers' Rink, D.C. Sports Chick and the crew over at On Frozen Blog.

My questions and comments are in bold. Everyone else is identified by their handle. The Q&A follows after the jump...

Despite the most recent cold streak, we've seen solid incremental improvement in the team's overall play since the start of the season. What's missing? If you were GMGM, what moves would you make over the last half of the season?

Other items to consider: Who's been the biggest surprise of the season? The biggest disappointment? Why?

OrderedChaos: Biggest Surprise: Had Erskine stayed healthy and continued his earlier level of play, he'd have been the leading candidate for me. As it is he hasn't played enough games for me to consider him (same for Nycholat). I'll go with Chris Clark instead -- his leadership on and off the ice has been impressive, and he's proving that last season's scoring was no fluke.

Biggest Disappointment: Kris Beech. I didn't expect brilliance, but he's been a complete washout IMO. Each burst of creativity is eclipsed by his mistakes (turnovers, shanked shots,etc.). This was likely his last serious chance with an NHL team, and he didn't prove himself -- not for lack of effort, but apparently for lack of skill.

PucksandBooks: Biggest surprise for me, easily, is Boyd Gordon. We knew he could PK, but 12 pts. in 37 games, virtually all of them 5-on-5? His +9 leads the team. He's outscoring Brian Sutherby, easily my biggest disappointment: just 3 goals in 43 games, and he has the hands for nearly 20 a year, easy. I'm also perplexed by Brooks Laich, whose production is not only down but who looks like a man without an assignment on the ice, when last year he was a three-zone impact guy.

GMGM -- Be an active listener in February, but hold on to all your kids unless you get blown away. We are also, IMO, past the point where we need to accumulate picks.

Gustafsson: If I were GMGM, I would try to get a veteran defenseman for someone like Beech or Zednick.... if anyone would have them. Clearly they are expendable assuming Backstrom joins the team next year.

Biggest surprise? Erskine. Who thought someone so far off the radar screen would have such a positive impact on the team. Obviously his injury is really hurting the team. One might even say Semin. Sure we knew he had speed and good hands, but to be putting up the numbers he is and the wicked shots on which he is scoring? A very pleasant surprise, indeed. Mike Green, too.

Biggest disappointment? Beech or Zednik. Beech has shown us nothing. Good thing he didn't cost us much. I include Zednik because he has produced as much as we would like, and his injury is a big source of disappointment.

DC Sports Chick: Brashear has been a pleasant surprise, once he settled into his role on the team. He hasn't been showing his age much. I'd also count Nycholat as a nice surprise. Two goals, five assists, +5 in twelve games...not too shabby. Chris Clark has been a huge surprise to me. He really stepped up to the captain role and is having a great season. Any guy who keeps playing after taking a puck to the mouth (and who wanted to play the next game) is amazing to me.

I wouldn't consider Kris Beech to be a disappointment, because I never expected much out of him to begin with. He looked pretty good in Hershey last season, but he didn't seem like he could handle the transition. I wouldn't exactly call Jamie Heward a disappointment since he's had a rough time this season with injuries, but it's obviously affecting him; he's one who's showing his age.

Japers' Rink: I don't think it's any secret that the team is missing a second-line center and a puck-moving defenseman. Add those two things and this is a playoff team and one that no one would want to face in the first round (as cliche as that is).

That said, while I'd love to see GMGM add those two pieces, I wouldn't do so at the cost of any players that are part of the long-term plan or at the expense of playing time for any such player. It's tempting to want to "go for it" now, given that the team is ahead of schedule in its rebuild, but I'd rather see GMGM et. al. build a team that can compete year after year, and that means they have to be patient now.

The biggest surprise of the season has been Alex Semin. No one really knew what they had with this kid (both on and off the ice), and most figured that a 30-goal season would be fantastic. Now he might have 30 at the All-Star break and has a legitimate shot at 50 and/or scoring more goals than Ovechkin (I'm not sure which would be the more impressive achievement). Honorable mention to Boyd Gordon.

As for disappointments, I'd say Brian Sutherby has been a let down. I don't expect 20-goals out of him, but he needs to be a solid 12- to 15-goal shut-down center who can win key faceoffs and right now he's not.

Can you evaluate the job that Glen Hanlon has done so far this season? How good a job is he doing developing the young talent? And is he the coach that is going to get this team back to the playoffs?

Gustafsson: I think Hanlon has done a fine job so far. Yes, there are some dreadful nights, but I would attribute that to lack of experience on the players side than on coaching. He seems to be developing the young talent well and unlike the Ron Wilson years, the team gets along with each other and the coaching staff well. I believe he is a coach that will be able to get the team back to the playoffs. We certainly could use some defensive help before that happens. I also believe that there should be more than one playoff appearance before any judgments are made about his ability to guide the team through the playoffs.

Japers' Rink: I'd separate the job Hanlon is doing into two categories - on-ice and off-ice. Off-ice, I think he's doing a good job of keeping the team pretty even-keeled. He doesn't let them get too low during a losing streak or too high when they're winning. And from all reports, the group of guys is as tight as any Caps team in ages (the polar opposite of Bruce Cassidy's "team"). Basically, he seems to know how to handle a young team, though he hasn't found the magic formula to keep them consistently focused for the full 60-minutes. Will his style translate into success as the team matures and expectations rise? I guess we'll see.

On-ice, I think Hanlon would be well-served to bring in a power-play specialist to help out behind the bench (I'd assume that management's dream is that Chris Bourque's dad will chip in). The team obviously has a good mix of talent and bangers, but they only really seem to find power-play success when someone does something special individually. There arent' back-door cuts or plays set-up from behind the net, etc. With guys like Ovechkin and Semin out there, the PP should be a little better than middle-of-the-pack, and that's an "X's and O's" issue.

As far as developing young talent, I think he's doing a fine job of getting guys as much ice time as they can handle without over-burdening them (though I'd like to see Mike Green get more ice, especially on the power-play) and still fielding a (usually) competitive squad. He's giving the young guys the opportunities to succeed - what they do (Boyd Gordon) or don't do (Jakub Klepis) with those chances is up to them.

Finally, regarding getting the team back to the playoffs, I think that because of the players he's being given (especially with the likely additions of Backstrom and Fehr next year) and the way this team is progressing, Hanlon can get the Caps back to the playoffs, but I'm not sure he's the guy to get them to the promised land. The goal has been "make the playoffs" for such a long time that once they're there, I think there's a chance to fall-off a little. I'd argue that players - especially younger ones - end up tuning out even very good coaches after a while and after they've reached a certain goal (think Ron Wilson), and that's when you might need some new blood to reinvigorate the squad.

PucksandBooks: I make a big distinction in evaluating coaches vs. players. So much of a coach's most important work is performed far away from the public (and press') eye, in private player meetings, the locker room, at skates at home and on the road, private film and strategy sessions with his assistants. Not just in hockey but all pro sports, coaching "assessments" by press and fans are far, far too superficial. Ron Wilson was a real lousy coach here at the end in D.C., right? Well, what none of us really knew at the time was how organization-killing #68 was. And the Sharks don't seem to be suffering too much with him, do they? A big-picture, broad-as-opposed-to-insider and nuanced opinion: Glen's the right man for the task at hand.

Japers' Rink: I agree, and personally I don't think Wilson was a lousy coach at all (obviously he's doing a great job with what I believe is the youngest team in the NHL right now). I think the players just stopped listening to "Crazy Ron," which is part of what I was getting at - sometimes a coach's schtick grows old and the players need an infusion of new blood behind the bench to refocus them, especially after they reach a big goal. For Wilson's Caps, this was the Finals, but you see it elsewhere, like in Tampa where after the Cup win, Tortorella has had some trouble getting his message across as effectively.

For Hanlon's Caps, "the playoffs" has been the carrot out in front for what seems like an eternity - it will be interesting to see if, once they get there, Hanlon can refocus the team on "the Cup."

Pivoting off of JP's power play comments, let's take a look at the blue line. While there has been incremental improvement, even Hanlon has admitted that the team isn't where it needs to be when it comes to cutting down on goals against. What do you think of the unit as a whole, and what stands out when you think about individual contributors?

Japers' Rink: I think the blueline is well on it's way, but there are guys being asked to play roles that they're simply not cut out for. Brian Pothier is probably a solid #3 defenseman, but he's getting #1 minutes in all situations, which is dicey. Steve Eminger is playing very well after a slow start, and is developing into a dependable #3-type. Mike Green will be a #1 or a #2, but he's not there yet. Shaone Morrisonn is just about a solid #2 or #3 defensive defenseman. Those are your core four, and, with the exception of Green, they're all being asked to fill spots they're not cut out for, so of course the result is less-than-desirable production both offensively and defensively. Add a true #1 defenseman that bumps everyone down a spot and you instantly have a very good blueline.

As for the rest of the d-corps, Heward and Muir are placeholders (and I wouldn't be sad to see either go), and Nycholat and Erskine are good 6th/7th defenseman options. The jury is obviously still out on Jeff Schultz and other prospects.

OrderedChoas: Good analysis -- the trickle-down effect of acquiring a #1 D-man would indeed have the Caps in very good shape.

Tangential question: We all know it's what the Caps need... but what exactly IS a #1 D-man, and how many exist in the NHL currently? Some names jump to mind like Pronger, Niedermayer, Chara, Lidstrom. The Johnsons are likely to be #1s some day, though not today. What about guys like Kaberle, Timonen, Preissing, McCabe, Bouwmeester, Souray (at -8 right now btw), etc.?

In other words, how many true #1 D-men are out there? Is it likely the Caps can snag one?

Gustafsson: The D has some solid players (if not now, then soon) in Green, Emminger, Pothier, and Morrison who are only going to get better by virtue of the minutes they play. Perhaps we'll see Shultz in the lineup next year and hopefully Erskine will heal up and continue to play at the level we was before the injury. As a whole, they are starting to develop well together. You have some solid games, but then you also have the games where they allow 30 shots per period and ask Kolzig to be the savior. Hopefully the ice time they are receiving will accelerate the skill level of the individual.

That being said, we still need to trade or sign a veteran D-man or two. We need to get a "secretary of defense" that we haven't had for years.

PucksandBooks: We could be seeing the formation of the core core of the blueline corps in the second half. I haven't seen the likes of this Steve Eminger of the past 10 days since his rookie year. And I'm not even talking about his point production. Very intrigued by Jamie Hunt in Hershey, and to a lesser extent Victor Dovgan with the Stingrays. Blueline development requires SO much more patience than that of forwards. (We gave up on John Oduya too early -- look for GMGM to learn from that.) Having said all this, the '07's is a VERY interesting class of UFA rearguards . . . particularly in HabLand (Souray AND Markov).

Next up: Goaltending. Despite some recent setbacks, we all know that Olie Kolzig has saved this team's bacon more than a few times this season. He's facing an incredible number of shots and keeping his team competitive. But what comes next? How many years can we count on Kolzig backstopping the Caps? When you see him in the locker room, he looks as fit as he ever has, but we all know what happens to athletes as they near 40...

Japers' Rink: What happens to them? They post GAAs around 2.00 like Dominik Hasek is doing this year at nearly 42? They give crappy teams a chance to win games like Ed Belfour is doing this year, also at nearly 42? Kolzig is five years younger than each of them and hasn't had the groin problems that have plagued Hasek nor the back (and by "back" I mean "drinking") problems that have plagued Belfour. Obviously those are two elite careers, but the point is that Kolzig easily has a couple of years left after his current contract runs out at the end of next year.

As the defense in front of him improves, the shots faced decrease, and the wins start coming more frequently, I think you will see a revitalized Olie Kolzig, much like you did for the first three months or so of this season.

PucksandBooks: Goalies, ISTM, age well relative to other positions, yours Chelioses notwithstanding. Gump Worsely, IIRC, played in the All Star game at like 43. Don't sninker, either, cause it was a heck of a lot tougher to crack NHL rosters in his day. And unlike Belfour, Olie has no reputation for opening and closing bars. I wouldn't be surprised if he was re-upped after next season. The price, though, will be interesting. BJ's in his perfect role, IMO.

Gustafsson: I think we'll have Godzilla between the pipes for another 3 years. He may demand a higher price, but I don't think the Caps will take a giant step back after making the strides forward.

The bigger question is who's after Kolzig? We thought our future was set thanks to Clark and the Flyers. We thought wrong. Is Max II the answer? Cassivi? or our Russian draft pick?

Japers' Rink: Hopefully Varlamov. Definitely not Cassivi. GMGM would be wise to address the possible interim with a low- to medium-cost acquisition along the way. What would the Rangers want for Montoya?

Since I've been in the press box all season there's one view that I haven't had: What is game night like these days? Despite the fact that the Caps have a player who is arguably the league's most explosive goal scorer, the fans aren't coming out. Outside of winning, what does this team need to do to start drawing fans?

Japers' Rink: I don't think there's any silver bullet - if you win, they will come. And there's no argument about who the League's most explosive goal scorer is.

PucksandBooks: Ah, my soapbox. I've been sounding the alarm on this for years.

It's the prices, stupid. Quite simply, there's an entire class of Washingtonians (the middle) who are priced out of hockey at Verizon Center. And I don't want to hear about two token Eagle's Nest rows. You don't addict people to hockey by assigning them perches in the Eagles Nest.

2007 is a notable year for the performing arts in D.C., especially for classical theater and Shakespeare. When it's literally the case that your Tuesday night tilt with the Panthers is more expensive than a Saturday night with the Royal Shakespeare Theater, you got a problem. And especially if you're sport # 5 in town.

What in the name of Greg Theberge are they doing charging $60 and $90 down low for September exhibition games? Those meaningless games, rife with AHLers, ought to have three price tiers: $10, $20, and $30. Instead of 2,400 announced as 7,200, you'd get a legitmate 10,000-plus paying customers, and if 200 of those people are first-timers who get addicted, is that a wise price-slashing investment? It took the Redskins decades to arrive at the point where they could price gouge, and they're able to do so because demand outpaces supply. The Caps have the formula precisely reversed: gouge before there's any demand.

Just this season we're beginning to learn of creative if piecemeal approaches to decrease admission costs -- for students in particular. But management needs to go A LOT further, a lot deeper. I'd actually tell them to price games in October and November -- which are historically impossible to get warm bodies for -- differently from games in January and February. Escalator pricing as the games carry greater impact. And season ticket holders get the low rate for the duration.

D.C. Sports Chick: One thing I've noticed this year is that there seem to be more Caps fans at the games. Not so much in number (obviously), but I feel like there are more people cheering the team on (or maybe they're just louder). For example, I was pleased to see at the Buffalo game in December that while there were a ton of obnoxious Slugs fans, there were more people rooting for the Caps. It definitely wasn't always like that; I can remember a few Rangers or Pens games several years ago where the crowd was 60% opposing fans. So there's more fans, or they've gotten more vocal. I'm not complaining about either option.

What can they do to get more fans? I don't think ice girls are going to bring them in. Better ticket specials would be nice. I know they're doing some, but they're usually on weeknights or involve things that don't apply to everyone ( i.e. the kids' ticket special). It would be nice if they could at least find a way to fill up the lower bowl. Give out more tickets. Offer a ticket upgrade. I don't know, I'm not a marketing guru, but I feel like they're missing a few key demographics (like women?) in the strategy. Also, I agree with J.P.- they have to win, and win consistently. Everyone loves a winner, especially when the Redskins and Nationals suck.

Gustafsson: I haven't been to many games, so I may not be a good one to answer what game nights are like these days. Why?

I have a three year old in daycare and own a house and the fun money we had before is just not there, so.... ticket prices are keeping me away right now. I believe my son is at the age that he needs his own ticket or we have to hire a baby sitter.... plus the cost of tickets... plus the cost of really bad beer.

I would love to be a season ticket holder, but I can't.

This team needs to win and the tickets need to be cheaper. I'm sure Ted will have his arguments for why the tickets are priced how they are. But I have my arguments why I no longer have my 11 game plan that I had for almost 10 years.

To wrap things up, if you had to give the team a letter grade so far, what would it be and why?

PucksandBooks: C+/B- . . . with a lean toward the B-. The Caps are perfectly on schedule with the rebuild, improved over a year ago. They likely will miss the playoffs but have seven or eight teams draft ahead of them in June, maybe a couple more. They'd even be solidly ahead of schedule were they more fortunate with respect to long-term injuries.

EmptyMaybe: B-. The Caps have over-achieved due to excellent goaltending and a better-than-expected offense, but injuries to the defense coupled with an overall lack of talent seem to be bringing the Caps back down to Earth.

Gustafsson: If you said at the beginning of the season the Caps would be around .500 I don't think many would believe you which would make me grade them higher... like B since they would be beyond expectations.

Given their inconsistencies and their stretches of horrible play causing them to tumble out of the playoff picture (for the moment).... would make me grade them lower.... like maybe a D.

We'll split the difference and go with a solid C.

Japers' Rink: I'd give the team a B-, but that's with the cave