Thursday, September 9, 2010

Thrashers Add Depth; A Good Idea?

The free agent market was slim pickings this off-season, at least on the offensive end of the spectrum, and the Thrashers did not get in on the Frolov and Ponikarovskys of the 2010 free agent class. They did, however, make subtle moves this week in adding Fredrik Modin to an $800,000 NHL contract and by adding Nigel Dawes to a two-way contract at league minimum.

While these are merely depth signings, the Modin signing has the potential to be a steal. Modin has a laser of a shot and could be a 20-goal scorer under one condition: he stays healthy. And that, my friends, has been quite the challenge for Modin, who hasn't played more than 50 games since 2006-2007 when he was in Columbus. He had 22 goals that season and has had eight 16+ goal seasons in the NHL. The drawback? Modin is turning 36 next month has played 23, 50, 24, and 20 games over the last four seasons respectively.

Secondly the team added Nigel Dawes, a smaller (5'9" 190) left wing. Dawes had 32 points (14 G, 18 A) last year in Calgary and has had success with the Rangers and Coyotes previously. Dawes in 25, however, and it seems to go against what Rick Dudley as been saying about letting the kids play. But are these two signings a hindrance to the kids playing or merely an intelligent back-up plan? Is it more beneficial to use a trial-by-fire method or groom the prospects we have?

It is widely believed Patrice Cormier, Spencer Machacek, and Alex Burmistrov have solid chances of cracking the Atlanta roster. Say hypothetically they make the team opening night...that leaves little extra space:

Antropov
Ladd
Kane
Little
Peverley
Bergfors (assuming he's resigned)
Modin
Slater
Boulton
Thorburn
Eager
Cormier
Burmistrov
Machacek
Dawes
Pettersson

That is 16 forwards by my count, not including Patrick Rissmiller and Angelo Esposito who have slim chances of making the squad. So is it more effective to let someone like Machacek play now or let Dawes play over him because he's better at this moment?

Dawes is likely a more effective NHL player at this point in time, merely because Machacek has played two NHL games to Dawes' 199. Say Dawes is the better player for sake of discussion; is it wiser to let the better player play, or the younger player who figures to be in the long term plans? Which is more beneficial now and which benefits down the road?

Machacek has proven himself at the AHL level, scoring 20+ goals in his first two pro years. He turns 22 next month. Dawes would appear to be the more beneficial choice at this point in time to play a bottom line role. But why should this bump Machacek to them minors again? He has to play in the NHL someday and now seems like as good of a time as any.

While it's tough to say, it could be more beneficial to guys like Cormier to take a step back to take two steps forward--play in the minors for a while to groom themselves to make a sure step into the NHL, rather than jumping in feet first. But would that jeopardize wins and losses this season? Is it wiser to play the kids and let them learn rather than playing role players like Dawes who don't figure into the long-term plans for the franchise?

It's a tough debate and will likely be answered within the next couple of weeks, but I suppose when it comes down to it you can never have enough depth.

What do you all think?