McKenna’s Musings: Lawson Crouse is the NHL’s latest fascinating arbitration case

I don’t like the Calgary Wranglers and there’s nothing you can do to change my mind.

Hey, I’m just talking about the team name. Not the Calgary Flames franchise or the team’s players. I wasn’t surprised when the Flames moved their AHL team to Calgary this offseason. The relocation made sense on so many levels. No more border issues. Easier recalls. More time with development coaches. On top of that, Stockton hadn’t been drawing well, so I can’t imagine the team was making money in The Golden State.

But that name. I don’t like it. Despite the moniker being a clear nod to the Calgary Stampede, it almost feels stolen. Why? Because I played for the Las Vegas Wranglers in the ECHL – when the Flames were our NHL affiliate.

I know this seems petty. And honestly, it is. I’m being indignant. But I’ve got a conspiracy theory to share. And being 2022 and all, I know how much people love a good conspiracy.

I can’t help but think someone in the Flames office is still around from those Wrangler affiliate days of the 2000’s. And that person championed the idea of using the name. I’m sure the discussion went something like this: “Hey, remember that Coast team we used to be affiliated with? You know, the one that our management would visit and act like they cared about the players on the ice when they really just wanted a free trip to Vegas? Yeah that’s a great name for our AHL team. Let’s go with it.”

Go ahead and debunk that one, Calgary.

But fair enough. It’s a great name for a team that plays in Alberta, where ranching is a way of life. I actually love that aspect. There are plenty of team names and mascots in this world that have zero connection to the city or region that they represent.

But still it feels so uninspired for Calgary to simply use the name of a former affiliate that they didn’t even own.

The Washington Capitals might have made the best coaching hire all summer.

You may not know the name Scott Allen, but you should. The man is a living legend among the players that he’s coached over a 25 year career behind the bench.

Allen is most known for his work teaching the finer points of penalty killing. And he should be. The NHL teams that Allen coached have all been phenomenal while short-handed.

But Washington is getting much more than a progressive systematic thinker. The Capitals are getting one of the finest human beings I’ve ever met.

I had the pleasure of playing for Scott in four different cities during my professional career. For three different organizations. And I can firmly say that the best years I had on the ice coincided with Allen being behind the bench. I don’t think it was a coincidence that when I was happiest, I played my best. And Scott always found a way to keep things serious yet fun.

But the key to Allen’s success is his ability to teach. Not only did he seem to know all the details, he could explain them. And as a player, that’s exactly what you crave. We want to know why.

It’s the most powerful word in the English language: ‘why.’ And especially with today’s generation of hockey players, if a coach can’t answer that question, there’s a good chance they won’t last very long.

And that’s where I think Scott was ahead of the curve in coaching. It’s only been recently that bench bosses realized that talking to players on a human level tends to get the best out of them over the long haul. And that fear only inspires short bursts of motivation, followed by indifference.

When I played for Scott, there were nights that he’d end up sleeping at the rink. And the players all knew it. Think about it. When your coach is putting in that kind of effort, it sets the tone, doesn’t it? You don’t want to let that person down when they’ve put their heart and soul into making you better as a player.

I think the Washington staff will be happy with the hiring of Allen. But more importantly, I know the players will.

Salary arbitration is such a ritualistic dance…until one side gets greedy.

Honestly, arbitration just makes me giggle. It’s such a show of posturing that ultimately ends the same way just about every time. The NHL team offers a number. The player wants a few million dollars more. And the agent runs negotiations right down to the wire, trying to get every penny out of the team possible. Ultimately the two sides meet in the middle and hammer out a new contract with an acceptable term.

But there are rare instances where a case is actually heard, and an arbitrator gets to make the final call. There are two NHL players left that might make it that far. Pavel Zacha of the Boston Bruins, and Jake Walman of the Detroit Red Wings. Arbitration hearings run through Aug. 11, but the player can sign any time before.

Why do players usually sign before arbitration? Because they know athletes that take negotiations to court get traded. I don’t have the exact numbers, but it happens frequently in the NHL. Players don’t want to risk being labeled as problematic and shipped out of town. It’s hard to recover from something like that.

I wonder if Zacha and Walman are really willing to be greedy enough to go for the big pay day. Same with each club. In my eyes, it’s not good business for either side to end up in arbitration. But I also think the NHL franchise has the majority share of power. Sometimes putting a foot down sends a message.

But Crouse’s case was pretty interesting. Early Monday it morning it was reported that the Coyotes forward agreed to a five-year contract extension worth $4.3 million a year. If I was his agent, I probably would have shot for the moon on dollars, too. Because what 25-year old entering his seventh NHL season would want to stick around in Arizona through a rebuild that’s been stuck on spin cycle for over a decade?

I think it’s a great deal for Crouse. In arbitration, he asked for $4 million. Arizona offered one year at $2.5 million. The five-year contract provides cost certainty for the Coyotes and stability for the player. Crouse was actually in an envious position: the Coyotes were really thin on talent and needed a few anchor players to stick around. Arizona had to choose between trading Crouse or retaining him at somewhat of a premium.

Developing 20-goal scorers isn’t as easy as it seems. Crouse can provide that. But I’m not sure the contract will look as good in five years as it does today.