2013 Hockey Arbitration Competition of Canada. Carl Gunnarsson v Toronto Maple Leafs Submission on Behalf of Carl Gunnarsson Submission by Team 24

Transcription

1 2013 Hockey Arbitration Competition of Canada Carl Gunnarsson v Toronto Maple Leafs Submission on Behalf of Carl Gunnarsson Submission by Team 24

2 Table of Contents 1. Introduction and Request for Hearing Session Analysis... 3 i. Quality of the Player s Contribution... 3 a) Platform Season... 3 b) Career Performance... 4 ii. Games Played and Injuries... 5 iii. Team s Success... 6 iv. Special Qualities... 7 v. Comparable Players... 7 a) Carl Gunnarsson v Kyle Quincey... 7 b) Carl Gunnarsson v Karl Alzner... 8 c) Carl Gunnarsson v Andrej Sekera ) Conclusion Page 2 of 10

3 1. Introduction and Request for Hearing Session This brief analyzes the hockey skills and qualities of defenceman Carl Gunnarsson ( Mr. Gunnarsson ) that reflect the appropriate value for his 2013 contract to be awarded by the Toronto Maple Leafs Hockey Club (the Club or the Maple Leafs ). Mr. Gunnarsson, 26, is entering his fifth season in The National Hockey League ( NHL ) and as a result of his age and years of service is eligible to file for salary arbitration under the NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement ( CBA ). For the following reasons based on the criteria set out in the NHL CBA, Mr. Gunnarsson is fairly entitled to a salary above the $3.15 million midpoint: i. Mr. Gunnarsson is a top four defenceman who plays in all different situations; ii. Mr. Gunnarsson had his best season as a NHL player in his platform season; iii. Mr. Gunnarsson has performed consistently over the course of his career and has been instrumental in the Maple Leaf s recent success; and iv. Mr. Gunnarsson s platform and/or career statistics are comparable to fellow defencemen, Kyle Quincey, Karl Alzner and Andrej Sekera. It is respectfully submitted that the panel find Mr. Gunnarsson is entitled to a salary above $3.15 million. 2. Analysis i. Quality of the Player s Contribution a) Platform Season During the lockout shortened 2013 NHL season Mr. Gunnarsson played predominantly as a shutdown defenceman for the Maple Leafs. He was playing against the opponent s best players every game. Based on the Corsi Relative Quality of Competition ( CRQoC ) (a measure that depends the quality of the competition that a player plays against) he was 11 th amongst NHL defencemen in terms of the quality of players that he played against. He was plus five on a team with a goal differential of five even while playing against the opponent s best players. He played an average of 21:16 minutes per game which was the third highest average on the team. Page 3 of 10

4 Table 1: Platform Statistics 1 GP G A PTS +/- PIM SOG Pts/G CRQoC PPG PPA PP/G TOI/G :17 Despite his defensive responsibilities Mr. Gunnarsson was able to amass one goal and 14 assists for a total of 15 points in 37 games played (0.41 points per game). This put him on pace for a career year in points. He was able to amass these points while playing the least amount of power play time per game in his career. The decrease in power play minutes is an indication of Toronto s desire for him to focus on playing strong defence, a role that he excelled in during his platform season. b) Career Performance Mr. Gunnarsson s first NHL season was in He started this season in the American Hockey League but was called up before Christmas and remained with the Maple Leafs for the duration of the season. 2 During this season he played in 43 games and recorded 15 points while playing 21:26. He was a career best plus eight in his rookie year. Table 2: Carl Gunnarsson Career Performance 3 Season GP G A PTS +/- PIM SOG Pts/G CRQoC PPG PPA TOI/G 09-' :26 10-' :15 11-' :42 CTP Platform :17 Career He spent his entire second season in NHL recording a career high in total points at 20. His ice-time decreased during this season to 18:15 but would increase the following season ( ) to an average above 21 minutes per game. During the season Mr Means Career To Platform Page 4 of 10

5 Gunnarsson emerged as a premier shutdown defenceman for the Maple Leafs. He played against the opposing team s best players (as illustrated by the CRQoC) and averaged the most ice-time in his career. Overall his career has been one of consistency. He is capable of playing in any situation but thrives when assigned the task of stopping the opposition s best players. In his platform year the Maple Leafs decreased his power play time so that he could focus on defence but he was nonetheless able to achieve a point per game average of 0.41 which is 0.10 better than his career point per game average of ii. Games Played and Injuries Mr. Gunnarsson has had some injuries over the course of his NHL career. In total he has missed 38 games as a result of these injuries with the most significant happening in his first season when he missed 22 games with a hyperextended elbow. It should be noted that Mr. Gunnarsson has recovered fully from all of his injuries and has never had a reoccurring injury. Further he has not had any concussion issues, a major concern in all sports today. Overall due to the nature of the injuries and Mr. Gunnarsson s dedication to recovering fully from each of them they should not have a negative impact on the salary awarded at the arbitration hearing. Table 3: Injuries 5 Season Injury Games missed Hyperextended Elbow Hand Ankle Separated Shoulder Hip Page 5 of 10

6 iii. Team s Success As mentioned above Mr. Gunnarsson is a key component to the Maple Leaf s defensive success. During his platform season he was second, to team Captain Dion Phaneuf, amongst Maple Leaf s defencemen in terms of quality of opponents that he played against (determined by CRQoC). 6 He also had the second highest plus/minus rating amongst Maple Leaf defencemen; this is very impressive considering he plays against the best players every night. Mr. Gunnarsson s importance to the Maple Leafs can been seen by comparing the team s success when he is in the lineup compared to when he is not. When Mr. Gunnarsson is in the lineup the Maple Leafs have recorded 1.05 points per game compared to just 0.86 when he does not play. As illustrated in Table 4 the Maple Leafs superior performance with Mr. Gunnarsson in the lineup has been a constant over the course of his career. Table 4: Success with Gunnarsson 7 Gunnarsson playing Season GP W L OT PTS PTS/G Total Gunnarsson not playing Season GP W L OT PTS PTS/G Total Page 6 of 10

7 The team has improved over the course of Mr. Gunnarsson s tenure and reached the playoffs last season for the first time since the season. 8 He is no doubt a cornerstone for the Maple Leaf s organization and will be crucial to their success going forward. iv. Special Qualities Mr. Gunnarsson had the opportunity to represent his country at three consecutive International Ice Hockey Federation World Championships from He played an important role helping Sweden win two bronze medals and one silver medal. v. Comparable Players For the purposes of establishing Mr. Gunnarsson s value to the Club, it is useful to compare his platform season statistics and his career to platform statistics with those of fellow defencemen Kyle Quincey, Karl Alzner and Andrej Sekera at the time when they were arbitration eligible. These players were selected as comparables due to a combination of the following factors; age, salary, position played, platform/career to platform offensive statistics and/or platform/career to platform defensive statistics. a) Carl Gunnarsson v Kyle Quincey Kyle Quincey ( Mr. Quincey ) was arbitration eligible following the NHL season. In that off season he signed a two year $7.55 million contract. This contract has an average annual cap hit of $3.775 million. This is $625,000 above Mr. Gunnarsson s midpoint. Up to and including his platform season Mr. Quincey had played in slightly more games than Mr. Gunnarsson but had there not been a lock out they would have played in a very similar number of games. In his platform season Mr. Quincey recorded seven goals and 19 assists in 72 (0.36 points per game) while averaging 21:51 minutes of ice. He had a minus one rating while playing against weaker opponents than Mr. Gunnarsson. 8 CBC.ca/ 9 Page 7 of 10

8 Table 5: Carl Gunnarsson v Kyle Quincey Carl Gunnarsson Midpoint: $3.15 million GP G A PTS +/- PIM SOG P/G Corsi Rel QoC PPG PPA TOI/G CTP Platform :17 Career Kyle Quincey 10 Cap hit: $3.755 million 11 GP G A PTS +/- PIM SOG P/G Corsi Rel QoC 12 PPG PPA TOI/G CTP Platform :51 Career Mr. Quincey has also had some significant injuries. He missed the last 53 games of the season with a shoulder injury. Earlier in the same season he missed eight games with a concussion Mr. Gunnarsson is a better defensive player demonstrated by the fact he plays against more difficult opposing players than Mr. Quincey but nonetheless has a higher plus/minus rating. Although Mr. Gunnarsson does not play as many minutes on the power play he is still able to register points at a similar rate to Mr. Quincey. It is therefore respectively submitted that given the value of Mr. Quincey s contract Mr. Gunnarsson is entitled to a salary above $3.15 million. b) Carl Gunnarsson v Karl Alzner Karl Alzner ( Mr. Alzner ) was arbitration eligible following the NHL season. In that off season he signed a four year contract worth $11.2 million. This contract has an average annual cap hit of $2.8 million, $315,000 below Mr. Gunnarsson s midpoint. 10 NHL.com 11 Capgeek.com 12 Page 8 of 10

9 Table 6: Carl Gunnarsson v Karl Alzner Carl Gunnarsson Midpoint: $3.15 million GP G A PTS +/- PIM SOG P/G Corsi Rel QoC PPG PPA TOI/G CTP Platform :17 Career Karl Alzner 13 Cap hit: $2.8 million 14 GP G A PTS +/- PIM SOG P/G Corsi Rel QoC 15 PPG PPA TOI/G CTP Platform :57 Career Mr. Alzner is a stay at home defenceman who throughout most of his career has been used by the Washington Capitals in a shutdown role. He plays a similar role as Mr. Gunnarsson however Mr. Gunnarsson is able to not only play against the opponent s top players but is also able to produce offensively. During their platform seasons Mr. Gunnarsson produce nearly 0.30 more points per game than Mr. Alzner. He also played more minutes per game against tougher opponents and recorded plus/minus rating that was 11 better than Mr. Alzner. Based on these platform season statistics as well as their career performance it is clear that Mr. Gunnarsson s value exceeds that of Mr. Alzner and he is therefore entitled to a salary above the $3.15 midpoint. c) Carl Gunnarsson v Andrej Sekera Andrej Sekera ( Mr. Sekera ) was arbitration eligible following the NHL season. In that off season he signed a four year $11 million contract. This contract has an average annual cap hit of $2.75 million, $400,000 below Mr. Gunnarsson s midpoint. The two players have similar numbers up to and including their platform seasons. Mr. Sekera had played nine more games, recording the same number of goals (12) and two more Page 9 of 10

10 assists than Mr. Gunnarsson. Table 7: Carl Gunnarsson v Andrej Sekera Carl Gunnarsson Midpoint: $3.15 million GP G A PTS +/- PIM SOG P/G Corsi Rel QoC PPG PPA TOI/G CTP Platform :17 Career Andrej Sekera 16 Cap hit: $2.75 million 17 GP G A PTS +/- PIM SOG P/G Corsi Rel QoC 18 PPG PPA TOI/G CTP Platform :06 Career Their points per game differ by on The reason why Mr. Gunnarsson has a higher value than Mr. Sekera is that he is a much stronger defensive player. Mr. Sekera does not play against the same caliber player as Mr. Gunnarsson (as determined by their Corsi Relative Quality of Competition. Given their similar point production and Mr. Gunnarsson s superior offensive abilities Mr. Gunnarsson is entitled to a salary greater than Mr. Sekera s $2.75 million. 3) Conclusion Mr. Gunnarsson is a reliable shut down defenceman who is able to play lots of minutes against the opposition s best players. He is able to make a great first pass out of his zone and create offensive opportunities. He is very important to the Maple Leaf s success as evidenced by their ability to win games with him in the lineup compared to when he is not. Further based on the salaries of Kyle Quincey, Karl Alzner and Andrej Sekera Mr. Gunnarsson s fair market value is above the $3.15 million midpoint. As such Mr. Gunnarsson respectfully requests that the arbitration panel find that Mr. Gunnarsson is entitled to a 2013 salary above $3.15 million Page 10 of 10