The Caps need for a center resolved itself a little when Tomas Fleischmann signed a one-year, $2.6 million contract a day before his arbitration hearing on July 27th. Couple that with George McPhee stating that he was prepared to go into the season with the team they have, and that makes it clear the Caps will look within the organization to fill their need for a much-needed pivot in the long term.

One of those options, 2009 first rounder Marcus Johansson, appears to need more time to adjust to the North American game, while 2010 first round pick Evgeny Kuznetsov needs another Russian spy swap to play out his 2-year KHL contract. That leaves “undersized, but feisty” Mathieu Perreault – who has had a lot of success at the AHL level with the defending Calder Cup Champions Hershey Bears.

Our question is: Will Matty P’s success in the AHL translate enough to sustain him at the NHL level?

Perreault is a quick and shifty skater who is a slick playmaker with the puck.  The Drummondville, Quebec native racked up 4 goals and 9 points in his first 21 NHL games this season.

While his lack of size may always be an issue, there is no questioning Perreault’s talent. He is potential second line centerman, whose quickness and creativity is suited greatly for the new NHL, though increased muscle mass wouldn’t hurt. (Hockey’s Future)

It seems that any review of Perreault’s play is often preceded by a form of “lacks size.” However, as Puck Prospectus correctly points out:

Small players are called “too small for the NHL” en masse, and the ones who do not pan out are held up as proof. This completely ignores the small players that do succeed in the NHL, and it completely ignores the fact that many large players don’t pan out either. Why are the hulking duds not said to be “too big for the NHL”? It’s a post-hoc rationalization; if a small player doesn’t succeed in the NHL, his size is used as a reason. But the professionals are unable to predict it before the fact.

Physical presence will always be an issue for Perreault – fairly or not. If we look at performance as an equation of Ability * Opportunity, this fact alone could reduce Perreault to a part time 3rd line center who eventually becomes a career AHLer. Also, if we observe Perry’s last 13 games in the NHL, an argument could be made that he was physically drained from going against bigger competition.

Looking at his AHL & NHL contributions we can draw some more conclusions.

Season    Age Team  Lg   GP  G   A   PTS
2008-09    21 HBH   AHL  77  11  39  50
2009-10    22 HBH   AHL  56  16  34  50
2009-10    22 WSH   NHL  21   4   5   9

What we see is Perreault’s Points Per Game drop from .75 during his two years in Hershey to .43 at the NHL level (~42% drop) while his even strength goals per game staying relatively constant (15 ES Goals in 133 AHL games vs. 3 in 21 games at NHL level). Based on Behind The Net’s study of league difficulty for the largest NHL feeder leagues, retaining 44% of AHL production to the NHL level is what one should expect.  Therefore, Perreault is at the average.

This would land Perry somewhere between 27 – 35 points for an 82 game NHL schedule in his second year, similar to the sophomore seasons of Peter Regin, Antoine Vermette, Alex Steen and David Backes. Third line centers – sure. Second line pivots for a Cup caliber team? Not likely.

Plus, since Perreault would be moving from Hershey’s 2nd line with some PP time to mostly 3rd line play in the NHL, his numbers could take even more of a hit. For instance, it won’t be often he gets to start in the offensive zone more than any other pivot except for Nicklas Backstrom against pretty weak competition.

Mathieu did make the most of his line time last year with Eric Fehr however, causing a 12% jump in Fehr’s CORSI when they were together on the ice. Making a scoring threat like Fehr better in regards to puck possession is certainly a step towards being a legitimate NHL talent. But looking at some comparables to Perreault based on his first season tempers those expectations a bit:

1. Jeff Taffe scored .90 Pts per game first two years in AHL which translated to 7 seasons at the NHL level, playing 174 games tallying 44 points – for his career.
2. Riku Haul scored .46 Pts per game first two years in AHL only to have that shrink to .14 per game at the NHL level. He played a total of 92 NHL games in three years.
3. Players like Benn Ferriero (.86 Pts/Gm in AHL -> .14 in NHL) , Andreas Thuresson (.4o -> .14) and Brad Marchand (.81 -> .05) all saw their production dwindle in their NHL debut seasons.

The fact that Perreault can forecheck and has shown spurts of being able to play “bigger” (6 points in his first 8 NHL games) says he probably has more upside than those with similar stats – even causing some to compare him to “late bloomers” like Marty St. Louis or Danny Briere. It’s worth noting though, that both of those players dominated AHL competition to a much greater degree than Perreault. St. Louis averaged 1.2 points per game in the AHL while Briere averaged 1.28 points per game – showing us a much higher ceiling for production than Perreault.

As you can see, the arguments for and against Matty P’s success in the NHL are both with merit. On one hand, we have an AHL scorer with some upside who makes a legitimate NHL threat like Eric Fehr better when they are paired. On the other we have an undersized 6th round pick (a 2nd rounder has less than a 30% chance to develop into a player who will play at least 150 games) who’s scoring droughts will be blamed for being physically unable to compete at the NHL level.

So that’s where you guys come in.  Where do you stand?  Are the stats simply against Perreault becoming a long or short term solution at center or will he be the next Marty St. Louis or Danny Briere? Let us know in the comments.

With Tomas Fleischmann’s arbitration hearing looming in the next few days it doesn’t look like the two sides will come to an agreement beforehand. GMGM moved pretty swiftly to avoid the courtroom drama with Fehr and Schultz indicating, at least to this writer, that the two sides are VERY far apart.

My guess is GMGM is taking the “show me you can do this again” attitude while Fleischmann is trying to cash in on what could be his peak season statistically. Either way, we are looking at arbitration. While it isn’t exactly Judge Judy, the player and team each propose a salary for the coming season and argue their cases at a hearing. The arbitrator, a neutral third party, then sets the player’s salary.

The evidence that can be used in arbitration cases:

• The player’s “overall performance” including statistics in all previous seasons.
• Injuries, illnesses and the number of games played.
• The player’s length of service with the team and in the NHL.
• The player’s “overall contribution” to the team’s success or failure.
• The player’s “special qualities of leadership or public appeal.”
• The performance and salary of any player alleged to be “comparable” to the player in the dispute.

Evidence that is not admissible:

• The salary and performance of a “comparable” player who signed a contract as an unrestricted free agent.
• Testimonials, video and media reports.
• The financial state of the team.
• The salary cap and the state of the team’s payroll.

NHL Arbitration Explained

Tomas Fleischmann was drafted by the Detroit Red Wings in the 2nd round (63rd overall) of the 2002 NHL Entry Draft. In February 2004 Flash was traded to the Capitals by Detroit along with Detroit’s 1st round choice in 2004 (which was used to draft Mike Green) and their 4th round choice in 2006 for Robert Lang.

As a prospect he was (aptly) described as a “flashy winger with great offensive tools” while being graded as “not quite good enough to play on the top line or pairing on a regular basis, but still possessing enough talent to contribute offensively.”

For the fourth consecutive season, Fleischmann improved upon his regular season goal and point totals but continued to fall flat in the playoffs (three goals and two assists in 22 career NHL playoff games) where he finally became a healthy-scratch in Game 7.

Despite his awful playoff numbers we can expect a significant increase to his cap-friendly $725,000 salary last year. JP from Japer’s Rink has already gone on record predicting an arbitration award of $2.9 million and that the Capitals won’t walk from any award under $4 million. Personally I take the “over” on the $2.9, especially with the Atlanta Thrashers being forced to walk away from a $2.4 million salary arbitration award to forward Clarke MacArthur and the comparables likely to be used in the Fleischmann arbitration.

To find comparable players I did a search at Hockey-Reference for players who were between the ages of 25 and 27, had seasons of 20 or more goals (Fleischmann had 23 in ’09-10) and fewer than 60 points (Fleischmann had 51).

Before we narrow down that list we should keep in mind the salary and performance of a “comparable” player who signed a contract as an unrestricted free agent is not admissible.

Forwards who have had similar seasons to Fleischmann’s 2009-2010 campaign
(69 games, 23 Goals, 28 Assists, 51 points):

Joe Pavelski, F, San Jose Sharks

67 Games, 25 Goals, 26 Assits, 51 Points

Pavelski, a 7th round pick in the 2003 NHL Entry Draft had almost no points after the first eight playoff games, but resigned with the Sharks for 4yrs/$16 million.

Alex Steen, F, St. Louis Blues

68 Games, 24 Goals, 23 Assists, 47 Points

The St. Louis Blues signed Alex Steen to a four-year contract extension (with an average value of $3.36mil) the summer after enjoying a bit of a breakout season with 24 goals last season.

Thomas Vanek, F, BUF

71 Games, 28 Goals, 25 Assists, 53 Points

Vanek was drafted by the Buffalo Sabres in the 1st round (5th overall) of the 2003 NHL Entry Draft. While he has shown to be a much more prolific scorer than Fleischmann there is no denying that their ’09-10 campaigns were virtually identical on paper in the box score stats. Look for Evans to push the envelope and have his client ask for a near identical salary award to Vanek’s $6.4 million.

The average contract value of the list above is roughly $4.6mil. Now I am not suggesting that this is what Fleischmann is worth nor that this is the exhaustive list that will be used in arbitration. As a matter of fact, the page limit for evidence is 40 pages. Forty. Oh. So yea, there is going to be a lot of stuff thrown around. So think of this post more as a conversation starter until July 28th and let us know:

1. What do you think Fleischmann will earn?
2. Who do you think Fleischmann’s comparables are?