An NHL team's owner walks into the packed news conference room with the head coach, sits down and starts to speak, solemnly, as if his pet hamster has just died.

	'BANG FOR THE BUCK' STANDINGS
	Below are the NHL's 30 teams with current payroll (CP) in millions, season-opening payroll (OP) in millions, points through March 3, and the number of points per million dollars spent (PPM) based on season-opening payroll:
	TEAM	CP	OP	PTS	PPM
	Minnesota	20.5	19.7	73	3.57
	Ottawa	30.3	28.0	88	2.90
	Vancouver	31.8	32.5	88	2.77
	Nashville	25.2	21.3	65	2.58
	Tampa Bay	28.9	28.3	71	2.46
	Edmonton	30.9	28.1	68	2.20
	Atlanta	25.6	22.5	54	2.11
	Columbus	28.2	27.3	55	1.95
	Pittsburgh	31.1	25.2	59	1.90
	Florida	32.7	25.6	61	1.87
	Anaheim	39.0	41.3	72	1.85
	Boston	37.3	40.8	67	1.80
	N.Y. Islanders	41.7	41.0	71	1.70
	Buffalo	31.1	30.6	52	1.68
	New Jersey	52.3	51.4	86	1.64
	Calgary	33.2	32.3	54	1.63
	Los Angeles	43.3	41.6	64	1.48
	Washington	50.7	49.9	73	1.46
	Toronto	54.3	53.0	79	1.45
	Philadelphia	56.0	54.1	81	1.45
	Dallas	61.1	67.3	89	1.44
	Chicago	44.5	44.4	63	1.42
	Phoenix	44.3	40.0	62	1.40
	St. Louis	63.1	58.6	80	1.37
	Colorado	60.8	61.1	82	1.35
	Carolina	39.2	37.4	51	1.30
	Montreal	48.6	44.5	63	1.30
	Detroit	68.0	66.1	84	1.24
	San Jose	47.8	48.0	59	1.23
	N.Y. Rangers	69.1	85.0	65	0.94

This is one of the toughest parts of the business, the owner says, but sometimes you just have to do what you have to do.

Although the player payroll is in the middle of the NHL pack, the team has underachieved because the fourth line belongs in the East Coast League; the free-agent winger signed in the offseason has delivered one goal this season for every $1.2 million of his salary; the organization hasn't uncovered or acquired a decent goalie since the Macarena was popular; and the most recent draft choices have been so bad, the Army wouldn't even take them.

Sometimes it is just time for a change, the owner says. You can't fire 23 players and it's obvious this fellow next to the owner -- the coach shows a trace of a smile, almost imperceptible, as eyes turn to him -- has done a pretty good job with this mediocre bunch.

But you can fire the guy who brought them there. So the general manager has been shown the door -- and asked to turn in his keycard on his way out.

That doesn't happen, of course, in a league which prefers to treat coaches as if they're disposable, but especially in comparison, holds general managers far less accountable. That's because general managers have this down to an art: They have become more chancellors of the exchequer than ever before, and they astutely in many cases manage to transfer most of the blame for any failures to the coaches.

It often seemed that Boston's Harry Sinden, for example, had been awarded tenure with terms a Harvard professor would resent. But he went through 14 coaches in 28 years, meaning Don Cherry's five seasons were a relative eternity.

Dodging responsibility for failure or underachievement is, and always has been, a general manager's art. Yes, GMs get fired, but nowhere near the rate as coaches, both because of the perception that a coach's effectiveness in day-to-day interaction with the players has a term limit; and, more significant, GMs scapegoat coaches to deflect blame.

So instead of sorting the standings by points, how about sorting them by points earned per million dollars spent?

As of this typing, here are NHL's top 10:

1, Minnesota, 3.6 points; 2, Ottawa, 2.9; 3, Vancouver, 2.8; 4, Nashville, 2.6; 5, Tampa Bay, 2.5; 6, Edmonton, 2.2; 7, Atlanta, 2.1; 8, Columbus, 1.9; 9, Pittsburgh, 1.9; 10, Florida, 1.9.

It's not just winning anymore, but minding the payroll and producing as much of a bang for the buck as possible.

The Dallas Stars?

They're way down the list, at 1.4.

Those numbers are points per million of each team's starting-season payroll, which is the fairest figure because that represents the resources on hand when everyone was optimistic.

So by that accounting, Minnesota's Doug Risebrough is the best general manager in the league this season. And the job Brian Burke has done in Vancouver, putting together one of the elite teams in the league on a payroll that falls below the NHL mean, is remarkable. Same with Ottawa, where the credit should be shared by Marshall Johnston, the former general manager now is in semi-retirement, and successor John Muckler.

That makes a lot of sense, and it's the way it should be. It's like any job. One component in your job evaluation should be how well you do, given the resources at your disposal. If you're the web designer at a company and every computer in the building, including yours, connects to the Internet at 14.4 baud, then you're at a disadvantage.

It's not just winning anymore, but minding the payroll and producing as much of a bang for the buck as possible. Bonus points are added for each round of the playoffs, because that means at least two more home games for every round and, just as important, momentum for season-ticket sales for the next fall. Every year, one of the biggest decisions made in hockey is the one season-ticket holders make, when they try to justify the exorbitant cost.

Winning the Stanley Cup answers all questions, of course, because that accomplishment is priceless. But maintaining that aura of elite status and making virtually annual deep-into-the-playoffs runs also are crucial. And the farther one gets down the bang-for-the-buck standings, the more marginal the differences. So GMs of the elite teams, which are fairly far down, aren't scrutinized as much for their ratio of cost to point production. But if you're not among the elite, you better have a good bang-for-the buck rating, and show a willingness to be a good soldier about paring.

Especially with U.S.-based franchises with relatively new owners, it also involves political skill. By ingratiating himself to the owner and speaking as if running a hockey franchise is only slightly less complex than building a nuclear reactor, the sly GM helps create an aura of indispensability.

Plus, even with ownerships committed to being among the upper reaches of the league's payroll structure, the key is to spend the money on the right players. That's the area in which Neil Smith and Glen Sather failed in New York; it's where Detroit's Ken Holland, New Jersey's Lou Lamoriello, Colorado's Pierre Lacroix, and Dallas' Doug Armstrong have done well. Even with financially aggressive ownerships, there are limits, and it involves the delicate balance of retaining the core and paring here and there to keep the payroll from approaching that of the Rangers, for example.

It all comes back to the bottom line, and the fine art of taking credit for successes while avoiding blame for the failures.

Terry Frei is a regular contributor to ESPN.com. His book, Simon and Schuster's "Horns, Hogs, and Nixon Coming," is available nationwide.