The fantasy implications of expansion, Holtby's elite status, a few breakout candidates and much, much more…

*

Laidlaw here checking in for a dump of thoughts mid-way through my summer hiatus. First I want to thank all the guys filling in for me. I've been checking in and you are all doing excellent work. Way to keep up the high standard! I'd love to tell you that I kept today's ramblings short and sweet but you all know that's just not my style. Buckle in.

*

With expansion looking like a reality, lots of folks are wondering what sort of fantasy impacts that will have. It's impossible to tell for sure but if we look back at previous expansion we can suss out a few things to watch out for.

The most obvious thing is the expansion of the player pool by something around 20 skaters and a couple of goalies per team. Assuming two expansion teams, that's 40 players and four extra goalies to consider. Those jobs will go to mostly bad players on bad teams. How bad, no one can say for sure.

If we assume these expansion rosters will be historically bad like last year's Sabres then you'll get no more than a couple of extra fantasy-relevant players and that also depends on your league size. Tyler Ennis led the Sabres with 46 points, followed by Matt Moulson with 41.

For most leagues a few extra 40-point players won't have an impact at all as those players are waiver fodder. In larger leagues it could add a couple of extra bargains. Whether or not that levels the playing field or increases the disparity between haves and have nots will be league dependant.

If however, we assume just run-of-the-mill badness like last year's Arizona Coyotes or Edmonton Oilers then the field of fantasy-relevant players expands that much more. Each of those teams boasted legitimate young stars like Oliver Ekman-Larsson, Keith Yandle, Taylor Hall, Ryan Nugent-Hopkins and Jordan Eberle along with a smattering of other intriguing options like Mikkel Boedker, Nail Yakupov, Shane Doan, Antoine Vermette, Martin Hanzal, Sam Gagner and Justin Schultz. Most of those players were ultimately waiver fodder in most leagues but guys like Eberle and Yandle had impacts in 95% of fantasy leagues.

Looking back at previous expansion teams:

The Nashville Predators had Cliff Ronning average 59 points over their first three years of existence and a smattering of 40-point forwards. Also, a young Kimmo Timonen emerged as an intriguing option on defense.

The Atlanta Thrashers had Andrew Brunette average 55 points for their first two year, got a 70-point season out of an aging Ray Ferraro in year two, and saw the exciting dual rookie seasons of Dany Heatley and Ilya Kovalchuk in year three.

The Minnesota Wild had Jacques Lemaire trying to suck the life out of hockey but even managed to give us some highlights like bringing Marian Gaborik into the league with a pair of 60-point seasons in years two and three. They also got an average of 55 points out of Andrew Brunette for a couple of years. Most importantly they introduced us to Rollie the Goalie, Dwayne Roloson who had a brief run as a fantasy gem in net.

Finally, the Columbus Blue Jackets gave Geoff Sanderson a couple of finally seasons of relevance before departing on the washed-up veteran victory tour, a couple of underrated Ray Whitney seasons where he scored 60+ points and nobody noticed and other various oddities like whatever an Espen Knutsen is.

Even during a period when the NHL was clutching and grabbing its way to lower and lower scoring totals these expansion teams still managed to add a player or two to the talent pool. I'd expect something similar to take place. A cagey veteran forward or two will latch on with whatever new expansion team pops up and will offer something in the range of 50-point scoring to lead the team while his former team back fills with new young talent and doesn't miss much. I cannot wait to see Jaromir Jagr suiting up in Las Vegas a couple of years from now. And just try to tell me you can't picture Mike Cammalleri in a Nordiques uniform.

But that's just the direct impact, there's also the indirect impact that expansion teams will have. They'll offer a crappy opponent for the league to beat up on. This could, in theory, boost scoring. Unfortunately for us, the last time the NHL went through expansion it was simultaneously crashing in terms of scoring.

From 1995-96 to 1997-98, the year before the most recent expansion began, league scoring fell from 3.14 goals per game to 2.92 and then 2.63. Expansion in 1998-99 hardly made a dent with scoring lingering at 2.64 goals per game. It jumped the following couple of seasons to 2.76 and 2.75 with further expansion but then dropped right back down to 2.62, 2.65 and finally a glacial 2.57 the year before the lockout, which is also the lowest we've seen scoring since the 1950's.

If expansion helped the situation then the impact it had was in delaying the inevitable tightening of the game that was taking place but there is an argument that expansion homogenized the game, thinning out the talent across more teams and reducing scoring.

To test this, we might look at how top teams scored before and after expansion. In 1995-96 the top three teams in the league scored 4.14, 3.98 and 3.96 goals per game respectively. In 1996-97 they scored 3.47, 3.34 and 3.33, while in 1997-98 they scored 3.12, 3.05, and 2.95.

Clearly top teams were affected by the slowing of the game well before any effect from expansion could take place. What happened after expansion?

In 1998-99 the top three teams scored 3.27, 3.02 and 2.99 goals per game respectively. In 1999-00 it was 3.39, 3.06 and 3.02, while in 2000-01 it was 3.60, 3.43 and 3.34.

There's enough there to suggest that maybe the once the league expanded by four teams there were enough bottom feeders for the top teams to pick on that the best teams really did get a boost but the data sample is so small I'd hate to draw conclusions.

Looking anecdotally at the top scorers each year tells a similarly murky story. Did the best scorers benefit from having weaker teams to pick on? Maybe but it's really hard to tell. From 1995-96 to 2000-01 there were strong years and lean years with no real way of discerning how or why beyond the notable absence of Mario Lemieux from 1997-98 through 1999-00 having been forced into retirement while still the best player in the game.

Ultimately, I just don't see a huge effect on fantasy hockey from expansion. Certainly, the deeper your league the greater the impact and expansion won't be friendly for those in cap leagues either as it expands the pot of money that can be spent, without necessarily expanding the pot of elite players with which to spend it on. That means the middle class will continue to be overpaid and I suspect that in most cap leagues there are enough overpaid mediocre players floating on the waiver wire as is. On the flip side, more teams means more bargains on entry-level deals so cap leaguers, there is a yin and yang to this expansion.

For the average pooler it means more names to track but not definitively more relevant names to track. Of course, the game is still growing in the US. Eventually they and other countries will produce enough talent to meet the increased demands of the league and at that point the talent pool of superstars and secondary stars may expand. It will take time to meet this demand, however. There is an argument that only now, some 15 years after the NHL last expanded that we are meeting the demands for talent of 30 teams.

I have to admit, I'm pretty saddened by this conclusion. I was all set to rant about how if expansion takes place in a couple of years it will coincide perfectly with Connor McDavid hitting years three through five, his real scoring prime. I wanted to go on and on about how we'd see McDavid hit heights Sidney Crosby didn't even hit because as Crosby was hitting his prime the league started tightening up again. I'm not ruling out 120-point madness from McDavid, because who knows, but I am ruling out expansion as a factor in causing it. You can all prepare to call me an idiot when McDavid breaks Marcel Dionne's single game scoring record against the Las Vegas Aces. I promise not to be offended.

*

As for my thoughts on expansion in general, I say bring it on. As I mentioned earlier, we are starting to catch up and fill the talent demands for the 30 teams we do have. If that influx doesn't plateau there will come a need to create more jobs, which means more teams. Maybe need isn't the right word there. Potential is perhaps the better term. After all, if there's more talent in the world than can fill 30 NHL teams then that left over talent trickles down to lower levels and AHL fans get a better product and then CHL fans get a better product and fans of European leagues get a better product. The NHL game doesn't HAVE to grow. But the potential is certainly coming and there does seem to be a demand for it in certain markets.

Demand, however is another issue. There isn't a demand for NHL hockey in all the cities that the NHL currently occupies. On this front expansion seems to be moving too quickly. That said, I'm not in any position to be telling the real fans that do exist in these communities that they don't deserve a team just because there aren't enough of them to consistently fill the arena if the team isn't doing well. So I wouldn't deny fans in Las Vegas or Quebec City or any other destination a team just because hockey isn't currently working in Arizona or Florida. Realistically, there are enough viable destinations for both expansion and relocation to take place.

Consider me an expansion optimist. The game is more entertaining than it's ever been. The players are bigger, faster and more skilled and there are just enough whistles to keep them honest. Sure, nets should probably be bigger and goalie pads should definitely be smaller to increase scoring but even without much scoring the game is fast, physical and entertaining. Expansion will homogenize things while the world catches up to fill the talent void but once it does, the more the merrier.

*

Speaking of the speed and excitement of the game. A huge reason for this is the growing number of agile, mobile, skilled defensemen playing the game today. It's practically a prerequisite at this point.

There will only be one Bobby Orr but that's because of how far ahead of his time he was. Now, teams are trying to ice six Orr's at once. Defensemen need to be able to skate the puck out or jump into the rush when the opportunity presents itself. That's why we are seeing more high scoring defensemen than we have in a while.

Coaches will eventually figure out a counter to this. They always do. But in the mean time you should expect to see big scoring figures from defensemen. Calgary is shooting to have five defensemen clear 30 points this season. They'll fail but a repeat of last season's four is a strong possibility.

*

If you are sitting on someone who flashed impressive stats during the playoffs and you are wondering what to make of them, my advice is to fall back on their regular season numbers. Each players' situation is specific and different but the general theme is that playoffs provide small sample sizes and shouldn't be viewed without considering the whole of the entire season as well. Bryan Bickell is the perfect example of this but so is Jonathan Quick who turns into another animal come playoff time but has mostly been a regular season disappointment.

*

Braden Holtby is looking for $8 million as he heads into salary arbitration. Don't be too boggled by that number. If he goes in asking for $6 million then he'll wind up with something less. He should get $6 million annually, on a long term deal. It's pretty much the going rate for starters outside of the top echelon.

There is always cause for concern when locking up a goaltender for so many years and so many dollars – see Smith, Mike – but the case for Holtby is as good as you'll find for someone who won't be asking for the Lundqvist contract.

Holtby's situation reminds me of the Cory Schneider one from a couple of years ago. While Holtby only has one full 82-game season as the bona fide #1 in Washington he's held down the title for three years running. He also has a statistical track record of elite play since cracking the NHL that one should have full confidence in.

Of goalies to have played over 4000 minutes over the past five years, Holtby's five-on-five save percentage ranks fifth, right behind Schneider. The three at the top are Tuukka Rask, Carey Price and Henrik Lundqvist making this pretty much a who's who of elite goaltending.

As for all-situation goaltending, Holtby ranks seventh in save percentage among goalies who have skated over 4000 minutes in the past five years. You'll never guess the names ahead of him on that list. Oh wait, of course you will. #elitestatus

What's amazing about Holtby's stance on this list is that it even comes after what everyone considers a terrible 2013-14 season. But he wasn't actually that bad that year. He still managed a 0.915 save percentage despite a goalie coach who was actively messing with him and a porous defensive group in front of him. His isn't a case like that of Devan Dubnyk where he has multiple years of shaky play behind him with only one elite year. Holtby has been elite every year but one and has actually put together a full 60+ start season of elite play.

With the coaching staff in place in Washington, Holtby is a top-five fantasy goalie. He was this past season and will be again next season.

*

And if you are wondering why 4000 minutes for the stats above, well that's the cut off for 66 starts worth of minutes. Not a high hurdle by any means but large enough to push out anyone with less than a season's worth of playing time. Looking at you, Thomas Greiss.

*

Is Cody Franson willing to accept the standard NHL-defenseman-who-can-walk-and-chew-gum-at-the-same-time contract? Because if he is, then I think there's a long term deal to be had for him on virtually any team in the league. It's the team that pushes above that $4 million annual standard that will land him. However, the team that pushes above that limit is also in for a disappointment.

You give Franson $4 million, he has a chance of outperforming that deal. Give him $5 million or more and that becomes much more challenging because he is limited as a player. He has a specific role that he can fill but he's not going to be a 22 minute a night guy – at least not without help.

That last caveat is what's important. The money spent landing Franson might also be required to provide the help he needs to be a top-four defenseman every night on a winning club.