Redder Winger
Registered User
- May 4, 2017
- 3,700
- 730
The most relevant peers.
You go on about Burakovsky. Burakovsky's on a top line in Washington now. They clearly had plans for him moving up when they gave him 3M. Burakovsky at every turn has been superior to AA in play, in presence on the team, everything. He's not a comparable.
I mean, look on the Wings at Petr Mrazek. He came in and gave them one year of FANTASTIC, Vezina-caliber goaltending. Now, he's a really weak link and the Wings are not likely to renew his deal at the end of this year. Same deal as AA. If they sign him for 2.5M or whatever it is he's asking for, what the hell do you do if he craps the bed? He's got one year of good play. You don't just assume that a guy is good because of one good year. What if this year everyone commits to stopping AA and he pots 10-12 goals?
A guy like Burakovsky did it... and then repeated it and then repeated it again.
There is a reason why teams (not just the Wings) sign veterans and give them chance after chance. Guys have track records of doing things. With a young player, you have to mitigate your risk that his one year isn't just a fluke. I mean, everyone kinda thought that Nyquist might have some sustainable goal pop because he was getting the same kind of high quality shots. If you remember the Nyquist explosion year... he was getting breakaways and other high percentage shots because he could turn the afterburners on and seemingly do it at will. Now, he's scoring 12 goals a year because teams started realizing he could do that.
It's not like we're saying "ZOMG, Patrick Eaves scored 30 goals and he only made 1M. 1.9M is what players with near identical stats and usage are getting paid.
Athanasiou could be on the top line today if Blashill wanted.
Just like Burakovsky is.
You said yourself you wouldn't have blinked at a 2x2.2M contract over the summer..
This isn't about Athanasiou's value vs production for you.
And that's all it's about for me.