BlueBaron
Registered User
I have not read the full thread, so my apologies if this has been mentioned earlier, but there is a nuance that has not been identified. I think when fans say that JVR is inconsistent, it is not that his season point totals are inconsistent because as many posters pointed out he has been a consistent 60 point scorer, but rather his intensity of play is inconsistent.
I argue that his skill-set outweighs his "floating" because he has certain skills such as an in front net presence on the power-play, his skills in tight, ability to play with different players, his consistent point scoring, and his playoff performances that will be difficult to replace. I hope we resign him at a reasonable cost.
In trading JVR, as a poster astutely pointed out, you must weigh the value of what we could realistically receive for JVR in his contract year, against what he would provide to our second year and potentially first year NHLers next year. He will rightfully receive a large salary after his current contract expires. There is no shame in letting an asset outlive its usefulness, if it will cost us more to retain this asset at the expense of other assets that when combined, would have a higher value.
Problem is there is some short sighted thinking in terms of how retaining him will cost us other assets. Chicago comes to mind. When your young guys get too good to stay cheap you make moves. Why does everyone ignore that we can sign him and trade him later when we have a cap crunch? I'll tell you why, people want to trade for the sake of trading and always site the same weak ass reasons. There is no prospect who projects as a #1 LW so why do people keep thinking that is an option?
It's HF stupidity. The grass is always greener, kids are better than Vets, and 29 goal scoring LW can be replaced by anyone. This is getting tired. There is no real good reason to get rid of JVR right now. There is no need and there are plenty of other options to get a good D.