The difference between Goose and Helm is that Helm turns 30 sometime this season and Goose was turning 26 entering into his prime.
I honestly would probably be calling this an excellent deal if Helm was 25 rather than 29. I'm looking at this situation in it's entire scope. I'll reiterate some points.
1. We have a log jam of NHL forwards.
2. We have a log jam of AHL forwards or extras trying to become NHL forwards (Mantha, AA, Jurco, Pulk, Bert, Callahan)
3. 5 years. This contract runs till he's 34. If 29 year old Helm's best is 33 points what will 32 y/o Helm be? 33? 34?
4. His best production was when he was 24 years old. His next best production was in 2015 where he thrived as Datsyuk's wing (Tatar - Datsyuk - Helm line). Can he repeat the production without Pav? I'm not saying he won't but it's something to think about.
5. Injury history. It's pretty bad. Doesn't mean it will happen again, doesn't mean it won't either. These things should be considered when making 5 year deals imo.
6. Was it worth paying $3.85 million when perhaps AA could take the role? AA doesn't have the same grit but he can probably provide the same duties on the third line and on the PK. We also have Nielsen now so the PK will primarily be his to handle.
7. Perhaps it is Helms market value. Maybe you guys are right. But does that mean management should pay it? I mean, it's not like it's Datsyuk hitting UFA. If that was the case, we do whatever we could to retain him. But was their hand really forced here? I don't think so.
I just don't see this contract working out in our favor. I hope I'm wrong though. And it all depends on if he has a NTC or NMC.
If there's a NMC then lol.
- gcom007 likes this