CARL GUNNARSSON THE TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS

Transcription

1 In the Matter of the Salary Arbitration Between CARL GUNNARSSON (the Player or Gunnarsson ) -and- THE TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS (or the Club ) OCTOBER 4, 2013 Appearances for the Toronto Maple Leafs TEAM 9

2 TEAM 9 1 Carl Gunnarsson has requested this arbitration pursuant to Article 12 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (the CBA ) between the National Hockey League (the NHL ) and the National Hockey League Player's Association (the NHLPA ). The Club hereby requests a one-year award at a salary of $1,800,000 for the season. This offer is based on all the reasons and evidence presented herein and to be submitted at the hearing, in conformity with the criteria established by the CBA and by precedent awards and settlements. More specifically, this offer is based on the following: INJURIES & MISSED GAMES In the truncated platform season, Carl Gunnarsson missed 11 games (23%) of the regular season. 1 This physical liability is a recurring theme of Gunnarsson s short career and there is a live risk that such injuries will only get exacerbated as he ages. Furthermore, over the last 3 seasons, Gunnarsson has missed 26 games due to injury or as a healthy scratch. 2 LACK OF PUBLIC PRESENCE / STAR POWER Carl Gunnarsson carries a neutral public persona. While the Player s avoidance of any negative controversy is appreciated, his lack of public presence and star power are not benefits to the Club. Accordingly, Gunnarsson should not be rewarded on par with players who actively expand and improve their Club s fan-base or public image. ONE-DIMENSIONAL PLAYER Limited Offensive Contribution Gunnarsson does not contribute offensively. Two-way players are prized assets in the NHL. Gunnarsson, a reasonably skilled defender, does not greatly add to the annual point totals of the Club. In the modern, high-scoring NHL, defenders who also contribute offensively are rightly awarded higher salaries than their peers who do not Ibid.

3 TEAM 9 2 Limited Physicality and Unreliable Defensive Play The Player is not a stand-out physical force within the Club or across the NHL. Gunnarsson is relatively light weight and takes few PIM, indicating a mild mannered playing style. Gunnarsson s play is not marked by exceptional defensive qualities either. For one who is given many defensive zone starts, Gunnarsson s moderate blocked shots and hits totals indicate that he is often scrambling and without the puck. The Player has undesirably accrued many more give-aways than take-aways that, with his career +/- rating, indicates a poor defensive performance. ONE YEAR CONTRACT Gunnarsson is one year away from being an unrestricted free agent. The Club is seeking a one year contract with the Player. The Club is not asking to purchase any of Gunnarsson s freeagent eligibility. Consequently, the Player will be able to leverage his free-agent status on the open market at the expiry of this brief extension. SALARY OF COMPARABLE PLAYERS When evaluating appropriate statistical comparables, several players of equal performance and calibre have arrived at settled agreements with their respective clubs in the last two seasons. Based on their respective negotiated salaries, the Club proposes that Gunnarsson should be offered a comparable award. PLAYER PROFILE Carl Gunnarsson is a 6 2, 196lbs defenseman for the Toronto Maple Leafs. 3 He was drafted 194 th overall in 2007 by Toronto. 4 Gunnarsson s first season with the Club was in when he was 23 years old. The following table summarizes Gunnarsson s four NHL seasons (all with the Toronto Maple Leafs). 3 Ibid. 4

4 TEAM 9 3 Carl Gunnarsson s NHL Career Regular Season Statistics 5,6 Season GP G A Pts +/- PIM TOI/G Hits Bks GvAs TkAs : : : : It is immediately apparent that Gunnarsson has consistently been a one-dimensional player. Even an optimistic projection of the Player s platform season, over a span of games equal to his earlier seasons, would see Gunnarsson produce under 30 Pts despite being more experienced and playing on a much improved Toronto Maple Leafs side that qualified for the playoffs for the first time in 8 years. 7 Drawing more attention to his one dimensional play, the seasons that Gunnarsson received his highest point totals are the years he produced the poorest defensive performances as indicated by his +/- rating. At 196lbs, Carl Gunnarsson is below the average weight for defenders in the NHL. By weight, Gunnarsson ranks 210 th out of 289 defenders playing in and 20 th on the Club s 27 man roster. 8 While not an offensive producer, the Player s low PIM and weight, suggest he is neither a dramatic physical force. This is punctuated by the 11 missed games due to a hip injury in the Player s platform season. 9 In the season prior, the Player missed 7 games due to finger, ankle and shoulder injuries. 10 Gunnarsson s diminutive physical profile would not be so concerning if the Player was not so susceptible to injury. By most standards, Gunnarsson is a pure defender. He scores little and has accumulated a moderate numbers of Hits and Bks. However, even under this constrained perspective, the Less common abbreviations: blocked shots ( Bks ); give-aways ( GvAs ); take-aways ( TkAs ) Supra note Ibid.

5 TEAM 9 4 Player has yet to meet an objective standard of high performance. Hits and Bks are more indicative of time spent without the puck and are the necessary by-products of desperate defending. 11 It is appreciated that Gunnarsson may be given more defensive zone starts (he is used short-handed much more frequently than on the power-play) 12. This deployment suits his typically unproductive style of play. However, what is most telling is Gunnarsson s poor ratio of TkAs to GvAs (1:3 in his platform season). It is normal for a defender to give the puck away more frequently than he wins it, but Gunnarsson presents an undesirable extreme - he ranked in the top 11% for the most give-aways among NHL defenders last season. 13 The Player does not bring any special dimension to the Club. His statistical returns suggest he is a player with a very limited role. He is not a two-way defender, he is injury prone, gives away the puck frequently, and resorts to desperate defensive tactics. Gunnarsson does not actively engage with the media or fans to increase the Club fan base and he is not viewed as a star player by the public. He displays no innate leadership qualities and has not been assigned any such role (like assistant captaincy) by the Club. ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE PLAYERS It presents some difficulties that Gunnarsson s platform season was shortened due to the NHL lock-out. Accordingly, preference should be given to comparable players who shared the shortened season as a platform year. Where comparable players are used who had an 82 game season during their platform year, their statistics will each be reduced to 58% (ratio of a 48 game season to a full 82). This will give Gunnarsson the advantage considering his injuries and low point returns will not be extrapolated negatively. It is also fair because it is a less 11 Also the perspective of analyst, Rob Vollman, see Hockey Abstract, 2013, CreateSpace Independent Publishing A&viewName=timeOnIce 13 Gunnarsson ranks 33 rd out of 289 defenders for most give-aways in the season, supra note 5.

6 TEAM 9 5 speculative model of prediction than assuming Gunnarsson s second half the season will equally reflect (for better or worse) his first half. The following objective statistical criteria were used to select comparable players to Carl Gunnarsson: Career to platform: must have played 142 games but no more than 306 (within 82 games of the Player s total) must be a defender with less than 80 career Pts (11 more than Gunnarsson s total) Platform year: at least 30 games played +/- 4 minutes of total ice time per game +/- 10 pts of Gunnarsson s total This process narrowed the selection down to three comparable players who not only have a similar career trajectory to Gunnarsson, but also a similar role and stay at home style of play. Contractual Comparison 14,15,16,17 Player Age Team Date Signed Platform Year New Contract Carl Gunnarsson 26 TOR TBD $1,325,000 TBD Karl Alzner 24 WSH July, 2013 $1,285,000 $2,800,000 Mark Fraser 26 TOR July, 2013 $600,000 $1,275,000 Mark Fayne 26 NJD July, 2012 $543,500 $1,300,000 Career to Platform Statistics 18 Player GP G A Pts +/- PIM Carl Gunnarsson Karl Alzner Mark Fraser Mark Fayne Supra note 5.

7 TEAM 9 6 Platform Year Statistics (adjusted to 58%) 19 Player GP G A Pts +/- PIM TOI/G Carl Gunnarsson :17 Karl Alzner :57 Mark Fraser :57 Mark Fayne 82(48) 4(2) 13(8) 17(10) -4(-2) 26(15) 20:11 cont d 20 Player Bks Hits GvA TkA SHTOI/G PPTOI/G Carl Gunnarsson :35 0:45 Karl Alzner :34 0:05 Mark Fraser :01 0:02 Mark Fayne 88(51) 84(49) 35(20) 20(12) 1:26 1:30 CARL GUNNARSSON & KARL ALZNER While 2 years younger than Gunnarsson, Karl Alzner began his playing career (1 year) sooner and, unhampered by major injuries, has accrued a similar amount of NHL experience. Both players are comparable, with similar GPs, Pts, PIM, and TOI/G. While Alzner has maintained slightly less Pts, Gunnarsson s totals are not significantly more to characterize him as a different type of player. In fact, Gunnarsson s slightly higher Pts return is traded off for a slightly worse +/- rating over their respective careers. In their platform season, both players made a similar number of Bks and Hit and GvAs. Their infrequent play during power plays and almost identical short-handed minutes suggest they the two are both utilized and play in a comparable manner. Gunnarsson and Alzner are effectively the same player. With the same relative NHL experience, both players have had a remarkable similar approach to the game. Neither player offers any stand out public presence. It should be noted that Alzner s $2.8 million contract was agreed to with the club on a long term deal and that Gunnarsson would not be giving up the years of free agency that Alzner sacrificed. Additionally, Alzner has proved himself a more effective 19 Ibid. 20 Less common abbreviations: short-handed time on ice per game ( SHTOI/G ); power play time on ice per game ( PPTOI/G )

8 TEAM 9 7 defender, with a better career +/- rating and a far superior TkAs to GvAs ratio (almost 1:1). CARL GUNNARSSON & MARK FRASER Gunnarsson and Fraser are the same age and play for the same Club. Using the above criteria, each player s GP, TOI/G, and Pts, over their respective careers and platform season indicate that they are comparable players. Fraser is a more physical defender and consequently he has accrued PIM than Gunnarsson. However, both players share a comparable ratio of TkAs to GvAs and play considerably less during power plays than short-handed. These factors indicate that they bring the same singular, defensive focus to their play. Again, Gunnarsson has a few more career Pts but not enough to classify him as an offensively minded defender. Mark Fraser settled on a $1.275 million contract this year. The Club is proposing that Gunnarsson is awarded a slightly higher amount to account for the Player s additional NHL experience and marginally greater offensive output. CARL GUNNARSSON & MARK FAYNE Mark Fayne s platform season was 82 games long (of which he did not miss a single game). Accordingly, 58% of his statistical totals in the platform season are used for fair comparison to Carl Gunnarsson. Fayne is 26 years old like Gunnarsson, and has played an approximately equal number of games in the NHL, accumulating similar point totals, PIM, and averaging comparable amount of TOI/G. A comparison of their platform seasons produces incredibly similar results in TOI/G, Pts, and PIM. Significantly, SHTOI/G and PPTOI/G indicate that Fayne was perceived as more of a two-way player than Gunnarsson. Those stats may also suggest that Fayne was not relied on as heavily in extreme defensive situations (being shorthanded). It is because of this versatile deployment that Fayne has a better TkAs to GvAs ratio

9 TEAM 9 8 and fewer Bks and Hits. However, TkAs and GvAs are not essential indicia of finding a comparable player. CONCLUSION The Club submits that Carl Gunnarsson's play in does not merit a salary increase. Gunnarsson is a one-dimensional player, who displays ineffective defensive statistics, is a physical liability and returns low point totals. The compensation paid to comparable players does not indicate that Gunnarsson should receive more than $1,800,000. Recent contracts signed by Karl Alzner, Mark Fraser and Mark Fayne support this assertion. Consequnetly the Club's offer of a one year contract of $1,800,000 for the season is fair and reasonable. The Club feels this is an appropriate acknowledgement of Gunnarsson s value to the team, and supports him to strive for excellence next season.