I wrote this article last semester. It was never posted here but it generated a strong response elsewhere.
* * *
Michael Peca, after finishing a one-year contract with the Toronto Maple Leafs, expressed his interest in coming back to Buffalo in the summer of 2007. This was the same summer that the Sabres lost their two co-captains, Chris Drury and Daniel Briere. Naturally, there were leadership questions heading into the 2007-2008 season. From what I understand, the biggest concern was whether or not Peca’s influence in the locker room would be positive or negative. He had a reputation as a "my way or the highway" type of leader. At the time, management had faith that leaders would emerge internally. Honestly, so did I. Obviously that didn’t happen as the Sabres clearly lacked leadership and direction in the two seasons that followed. So was it a mistake when the Sabres passed on Michael Peca?
It’s tough to say, a lot of factors have to be considered. Here are the numbers: In the two seasons that followed his signing, Peca averaged 68 games played, 6 goals, 22 assists, and 16:20 in ice time per game. That’s decent production considering Columbus paid for him close to 1-million dollars each year. He proved to be quite durable as well. But as is so often the problem with players like Peca, it’s tough to judge his value based on those numbers alone. He’s a defensive forward.
As far as the team record is concerned, in the two years prior to Peca’s arrival, the Blue Jackets finished at an average of 12th place in the Western Conference. In the two years Peca has been in Columbus, the Blue Jackets finished an average of 10th place. Not much difference, but an improvement. Remember, Columbus has been a mess the past 10 years.
The stat that really jumped out at me however was how much better Columbus performed defensively when Peca was on the roster. In the two years prior to Peca’s arrival, and keep in mind one of those years was before the lockout when goals were less frequent, the average number of goals given up each season by Columbus was 264 and the teams goal differential was -52. In the two years after Peca’s arrival, Columbus averaged 224 goals given up per season with a -15 goal differential. Clearly, the Blue Jackets were much better defensively when Peca was on the roster.
Now, the Blue Jackets improvement can’t be totally attributed to the arrival of Michael Peca. Prior to the 2008-2009 season, Columbus acquired defenseman Fedor Tyutin, Christian Backman, and Mike Commodore. In addition Ken Hitchcock was hired as the new coach near the start of the 2006-2007 season. And clearly, the emergence of goaltenders Pascal Leclaire and Steve Mason had a lot to do in the reduction of goals scored.
But consider this, out of all the players on the 2008-2009 Columbus roster, only two players were above the age of 30: Fredrick Modin and Michael Peca. Is it safe to say those guys were leaders on this team? Columbus thought so; Peca was an assistant captain. He may not have been the most productive player on the score sheet, even though he was 3rd on the team in scoring in 2007-208 season, but Peca certainly had value as a leader for this team. They went to the playoffs last spring too.
Whether or not Peca would have had the same influence for the Sabres is debatable. Chemistry is a funny thing. But honestly, could Peca’s presence on the Sabres possibly have resulted in a worse record than the Sabres amassed in the last two years? I doubt it. Again, I agreed with Sabres management when they decided to pass on Peca at the time. But I don’t get paid to make those decisions. In any event, it’s a discussion I feel is worth having.