IN THE MATTER OF SALARY ARBITRATION BETWEEN: CODY FRANSON. - and - THE TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS BRIEF OF CODY FRANSON TEAM 19

Transcription

1 IN THE MATTER OF SALARY ARBITRATION BETWEEN: CODY FRANSON - and - THE TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS BRIEF OF CODY FRANSON TEAM 19

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW... 1 II. OFFENSIVE DEFENCEMAN 1 III. PLAYOFF EXCELLENCE 2 IV. BIG AND PHYSICAL 3 V. THE PLUS MINUS STORY 4 VI. VALID COMPARABLE PLAYERS A) JASON DEMERS SAN JOSE SHARKS 5 B) KYLE QUINCY DETROIT RED WINGS 7 VII. CONCLUSION 8

3 I. Introduction and Overview Pursuant to section 12.9 of the NHL collective bargain agreement, this brief will analyze the performance of the Toronto Maple Leafs Cody Franson. 1 A big, physical offensive defenceman who at 27 years of age is just entering his prime, Mr. Franson has a proven track record not only in the regular season, but also in the playoffs. An effective point producer, he has developed the ability to effectively and consistently play a disciplined physical game without the risk of bad penalties. Proving he has the ability to produce points year in and year out, he has also shown flashes of being an elite offensive defenceman that plays a physical game. Mr. Franson s attributes put his value higher than the $3.3 million midpoint salary, and more appropriately put him at the $4 million level. II. Offensive Defenceman Cody Franson has been a prolific point producer at every level he has played at beginning in junior hockey, continuing through his stints in the AHL and finally over his 5 seasons in the NHL 2. As a young player in Nashville competing for quality ice team on a team with a defence laden with veteran all stars, he was able to produce admirably scoring points at about.35/game average his first two years. 3 His first year in Toronto, despite having to make adjustments to his game to fit in, he raised that slightly to about.37/game. In his 2 nd year with Toronto (4 th in the NHL) he had a break out year scoring at a.65/game clip making him not only the leading scorer of defenceman on the Leafs, but 4 th on the team in scoring, and second in the entire NHL for scoring by a defenceman. While his scoring dropped below that in his 5 th NHL season last year, it was still at 1 NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement, 2005, s Ibid.

4 .42/game, which lead the Leafs defence corps once again. That.42/game pace mirrors his career average, proving that he is a consistently capable point producer at the NHL level. 4 He achieved that point production while starting the season without the benefit of any training camp, as he was without a contract at the beginning of the season last year, putting him at a disadvantage. The type of offensive numbers Mr. Franson has put up over an extended 5-year period validates his value at $4million. III. PLAYOFF EXCELLENCE Mr. Franson has shown an ability to raise his game when it counts the most, as can be seen by his impressive playoff performances. He has been to the playoffs 3 times in his 5-year career, amassing an impressive.57 points/playoff game. If you discount his rookie year, that number increases to.63 points per game. In the 2010/2011 playoffs, he tied for the team lead with all-star Gary Suter for points by a defenceman with 6 points in 12 games, surpassing teammate and 3 time Norris trophy finalist Shea Webber. In the 2012/2013 playoffs with the Leafs he was the leading scorer among defenceman, scoring 6 points in 6 games tying him for second in overall team scoring with Phil Kessel, one point behind team leader James Van Riemsdyk. The Leafs were within less than a period of pulling off a game 7 stunning upset of the Eastern Conference powerhouse Boston Bruins in the franchises first playoff series in 8 years. Those playoff performances show his ability to perform at an elite level when it counts most and strongly reinforces the player s value at $4million. 4 Ibid.

5 IV. A BIG AND PHYSICAL At 6 5 and 213 pounds Cody Franson is a physically imposing presence on the ice. 5 Scouts often said that the one thing they would change on him is he does not use his size enough. 6 In his first full year in Nashville he only recorded 55 hits in 61 games for an average of.90 hits/game. Although slightly improved, he remained steady in his second year recording an average of 1.01 hits/game. 7 When he came to Toronto in a trade, he found himself in the position of having to prove himself all over again with a new coach. In the beginning of the season he seemed to struggle to find his place and was a healthy scratch. He played his way back into the lineup. Another coaching change meant doing it all over again. Randy Carlyle, his 3 rd coach in a short amount of time, expected him to use his size and by physical. 8 While in his first year with the leafs he upped his hits to 1.79/game, his second year (fourth in the NHL) he shot all the way up to an impressive 2.76/hits per game putting him in the top 25 in the league. Heeding his coach s wishes he transformed himself so completely that he led the Leafs, and was second in the entire NHL in hits with an impressive 282 hits for an average of 3.57 hits/game. That was almost 4 times as many hits per game than he had in his rookie season. 9 Mr. Franson introduced the physical element of his game while maintaining his discipline. He only amassed 30 penalty minutes (PIM), which equaled the same number of PIMs in his second year where he played fewer games, and not much above his career average. 10 This discipline allows his coach and teammates to rely on him to keep up his physical play without the worry of him taking costly penalties. Cody Franson has 5 Ibid

6 impressive size and has shown the commitment to use it by playing a physical, disciplined game, providing a compelling factor why his worth is justified at $4million. V. THE PLUS/MINUS STORY Statistically it is hard to deny that Cody Franson has amassed an impressive record in his first 5 NHL seasons. It tells a story of a point producing, physical and disciplined player who plays at his highest level in the playoffs. The one glaring negative that jumps out is his plus/minus figure for the 2013/2014 season, which was -20. On the surface, critics will point to that statistic as a red flag of some sort. Further analysis refutes that. When looking at his career as a whole, this number stands out as an anomaly. His career average plus/minus rating stands at If you take out last years figure, it jumps substantially to +7, and was only a minus player once before in his third year (and then only a 1). While with Nashville, a superior defensive team to the Leafs, he averaged even though those were his first two years as an NHL defenceman. 11 The Leafs as a team struggled badly defensively in 2013/ While it is difficult to pinpoint exact reasons why they struggled so badly, it was apparent to management that coaching was an issue. While Randy Carlyle remained as head coach, the entire assistant coaching staff was replaced at the end of the season. 13 There was talk that the Swarm defence that the team tried to implement was never effective, and it was abandoned coming into this year. 14 Again it is important to mention that Mr. Franson missed training camp, meaning he lost valuable time learning a complicated new system. A look at who Mr. Franson was paired with is telling. The Leafs decided to make 18 year-old rookie Morgan Rielly a regular full time addition to their top 6. They also had 11 Ibid http:// hour_cox.html 14

7 a relatively inexperienced Jake Gardener as a regular. Both have tremendous upside offensively, but Reilly s complete lack of experience, and Gardener s propensity for illadvised risk taking meant both were often defensive liabilities. 15 He was tasked with playing over 2/3 rd of his even strength time with Gardiner and Reilly. He played 1203 even strength minutes the entire season, 607 of those with Jake Gardiner, and 225 with Morgan Rielly. 16 Contrast that with the previous season where he played arguably at an all-star level, he played with stay at home defensive defenceman Mark Fraser. 17 The statistics of his first four years, combined with all the mitigating factors of last year point to his plus minus figure for 2013/2014 as an anomaly and not something that should negatively affect his $4million worth. VI. VALID COMPARABLE PLAYERS A) JASON DEMERS SAN JOSE SHARKS Jason Demers broke into the league the same year, in the 2009/2010 season. 18 Entering into an arbitration eligible season, Mr. Demers re-signed without going to arbitration, giving up a year of free agency by signing a two-year contract with an average value of $3.4 million per season. 19 Last season they both played an identical average of 16:08 per game, with Mr. Franson getting more special teams time. Scoring stats were very similar with Mr. Demers last year as he counted 34 points to Mr. Franson s 33. Their career averages show a marked difference with Mr. Franson s 0.42pts/game higher than Mr. Demer s who averaged 0.34/game. There is a stark contrast 15 Problems/193/ Ibid

8 in playoff performance between the players. Cody Franson has increased production under the pressures of the playoffs with an impressive 0.57 points per game average. Jason Demers on the other hand has seen his production in the playoffs drop off dramatically down to a 0.23 points per game, less than half that of Mr. Franson. 20 Jason Demers is much smaller than Cody Franson at 6 1 and 195 pounds, compared to Mr. Franson at 6 5 and 213 pounds. 21 His inferior stature matches his lack of physicality compared to Mr. Franson as he only dished out 69 hits for an average of 0.92 hits per game (NHL rank #334 in total hits) compared to Mr. Franson who imposed himself on opponents 282 times for an average of 3.57 times per game (NHL rank #2 in total hits). 22 Cody Franson hit his opponents at a rate almost 4 times higher than Jason Demers, while maintaining almost identical point production. Mr. Demers did have a better +/- rating, but he played on the team with the 5 th best regular season record in the NHL that had a +49 goal differential, compared to Mr. Franson who played on the team with the 23rd best regular season record that had a -25 goal differential. 23 Mr. Franson s poor plus minus for last year can be explained by factors that point to it being an anomaly and if you eliminate last year from both player s career stats, then Mr. Franson shows a superior +/- of +28 compared to Mr. Demers at only +12. Furthermore, while Mr. Franson is a plus player in the playoffs, Mr. Demers is a minus player, furthering the case that Cody Franson is a superior playoff performer. 24 Cody Franson has produced points at a higher rate and more consistently in his career and is more physically imposing. His proven desire and ability to impose his Ibid. 22http:// rstats

9 physicality by being one of the top body checkers in the league, while Mr. Demers does not seem to have that element to his game, as well as Mr. Franson s ability to elevate his game in the playoffs while Mr. Demers game regresses, makes Cody Franson a more valuable player than Jason Demers and deserving of the $4million dollar figure when compared to Mr. Demers salary of $3.4 million. B) KYLE QUINCY DETROIT RED WINGS Kyle Quincy born August 12, 1985 is a full two years older than Cody Franson, but only broke into the league one year ahead in the 2008/2009 season. Last year he logged more ice time at 18:09/game, just over two minutes more/game than Mr. Franson. He logged very little power play time (0:19/game) but played significant penalty killing time (2:26). His point production last season was very low and off of his career average. He only registered 13 points for an average under 0.16/game, compared to his career average, which is just under.30/game. While his career average is within the range of Mr. Franson s (.34 to.30 in favor of Franson), a closer look reveals the reality that his point production has dropped off dramatically over the last two seasons. It raises legitimate doubt as to whether the last two years were an anomaly, or a clearer indication of the player he is now. If you look at his playoff performances, they point to the last two years as an indicator of his inability to produce points. He has significant playoff experience, but very little point production. He produces points in the playoffs at a very low 0.09 points/game, compared to Mr. Franson s At 6 2 and 207 he is a big body, but still gives up 3 inches to Mr. Franson. His 88 penalty minutes last year were a career high, and 58 minutes more than Mr. Franson, 25

10 suggesting that he may be a physical player. 26 His hits per game statistics show a different story as he only averaged 1.07 hits/game, ranking him well down at 249 th overall. Mr. Franson delivered 3.5 times the number of hits/game, while seeing the penalty box at about a third of the rate that Mr. Quincy did. 27 Kyle Quincy s +/- was better than Mr. Franson s, but he was still in the negative at - 5. Overall for his career he is a minus player, with a +/- behind Mr. Franson s. 28 Comparatively speaking, Cody Franson is clearly on level with Kyle Quincy, and the above factors point to a legitimate argument that Cody Franson has a higher value. Kyle Quincy s 2-year contract at $4.25 million/season legitimizes the claim that Cody Franson is deserving of the $4million dollar figure. VII. CONCLUSION Having just turned 27 years of age, Cody Franson is just coming into his prime as an NHL defenceman. A veteran of 5 years in the league, he has created a body of work that not only demonstrates his natural gift as a proven point producing defenceman, but has also shown his commitment to take advantage of his imposing size. The change in his game has been dramatic, as evidenced by his rocketing up the NHL rankings in hits per game to number 2 in the entire NHL. He has done so without sacrificing his point production, which has seen him lead the Leafs in scoring for defenceman the last two years. This is all combined with his proven ability to raise his game when it counts most, in the playoffs. Compared with other players in the price range, it is evident that Cody Franson is deserving of a salary higher than the mid-range price of $3.3 million, and deserves a figure more in the range of $4 million rstats 28

11