People all over the internet keep saying "I want these sheets!". They're nuts. Who the hell wants Mike Babcock's disapproving glare watching over everything they do in bed? You can almost see him thinking "Luke Glendening works harder than that" whenever you're making love to your partner.
Professionals will be professionals, whether they're in Vegas or not. They'll be fine. Conversely, the types of guys tempted by the combination of booze, money, and stardom won't. But that's true everywhere. Darren McCarty didn't need to be in Vegas to throw his career down the toilet. He did it right here in crummy old Detroit. And he had arguably the most player friendly organization in sports behind him. He screwed it up because he's a screw up and that's what screw ups do. I hardly think a determining factor in the league's expansion plans should be how the location will affect the playing careers of the various screw ups around the league.
When it comes to any discussion of Franson, I feel like it's important to remember that most analysis of him is in comparison to other defensemen in his salary range. He's definitely not a bad defender. He's probably better than 60% of all other defensemen out there. He's clearly a top four defender, and among those he's shown that he can score better than most. But he's also worse defensively, and his skating isn't great. But again, that's in comparison to other top four guys looking for 5+ million.
I think sometimes we focus so much on these guys' positive and negative attributes that we end up getting tunnel vision and fail to think about them in context. Cody Franson is a pretty good defenseman. He's not Brendan Smith or Jacub Kindl. He's like the inverse of Kyle Quincey. A top four guy who's a little worse than average defensively, and a little better than average offensively. His problem is that he thinks 30+ points per season puts him into Matt Niskanen salary range. Which it doesn't, given his limitations.
Yes, but there are also people in these threads that take the practice of discourse and their opinions way too seriously while at the same time not really knowing what they are talking about.
Discourse shmishcourse. I ain't come here to join a debate team. I came here to talk hockey. Don't need a Ph.D. in Rhetoric from Carnegie Mellon to do that. Just need a coupla cold Labatt Blues, the ol' eyeball test, and some homespun cliches. Just as Don Cherry intended.
I think that a lot of the success attributed to Howard AND Mrazek really belongs to Babcock's shot suppression system. I'm not saying that either guy wouldn't be good otherwise, but it's pretty clear that they didn't get challenged nearly as much as most goalies do. I think I'd wait to see how things pan out under Blashill before I start penciling in starting goalies. Might be that Howard stink worse than we thought, and Petr easily takes the job. Then again, maybe Mrazek falters under more shots every single night and the veteran is our saving grace. Who knows?
So you think the contract is bad or no? More examples: Tarasenko at 7.5 or Stepan at 6.5.
Voracek was 5th in the entire league in scoring this last season. And he's big and he's young. I'm saying he pretty much got market value.
I think he probably got paid a little too much. But not terribly so. I guess my overall point is that for negotiation purposes, contracts for guys like Kane, Toews, and ROR matter. But in determining a players actual value they don't say much. All three of those guys got paid the way they did because of externalities. I guess what I'm saying is, there's a tendency to think "Well if O'Reilly got 7.5 then Voracek is worth 8.5". Which is how contract negotiations work, I understand, but it's flawed because O'Reilly isn't actually worth 7.5. He's just worth that to a desperate team.
I agree with your overall point, but I wouldn't look too much into your examples. Toews and Kane are worth whatever they want, for the most part. You can surround them with anybody else and they win you Cups. The return on investment with those two is insane.
With O'Reilly it's just a matter of a bad team trying to put itself on the map. Any competitive team wouldn't have paid him that. But Buffalo desperately needs some legitimacy, to get it you need good players, and to get them (if you're a small market and you suck) you have to overpay. Guys like O'Reilly ain't going to Buffalo for the girls and the nightlife.
Toews is not overrated. He's like zetterberg. He's got superior
Defense, puck control skills, vision, and competitiveness, and above average everything else. He's just not flashy, which makes everybody go gaga but doesnt make someone one iota more "elite". Kopitar is the same way.
I don't hate Andersson. He's useful(ish) I guess. In the same way that Emmerton was. But he's no more physical, defensively responsible, or speedy than either of Callahan or Ferraro. Additionally, each of them have shown considerably more upside than Andersson offensively. His one big plus is that he can, in a pinch, center a line. But so can Dats, Z, Richards, Sheahan, Helm, Glendening, and Abby or Franzen (in a pinch). Plus we've got a couple real quality centers in GR who could fill in if need be. So Andersson's big plus doesn't really have as much utility as it might otherwise.
Andersson's roster spot is not even close to guaranteed. The fact that he had one in the first place has to do with the fact that A) our centers have been banged up for the better part of two years, and B) Babcock's default preference is defensive responsibility over any other skillset when forced to choose (anybody remember Nestrasil making the opening day roster last season lol?).