Richard88
John 3:16
- Jun 29, 2019
- 19,180
- 20,816
Does Tatar really have the higher upside though? He'll be 31 in December and chances are his production will decrease over the course of his next contract. He's also not a great solution in the playoffs where we'll likely be facing physical teams like Dallas, Winnipeg, St. Louis, and Vegas again.Those playoff paces equate to a difference of about 3 points based on a 25 game playoffs. Give me the higher upside and far better defensive player in Tatar even if Debrusk has averaged a couple of extra playoff points per game
DeBrusk has his flaws but is still only 24 with room to grow, especially if he came to a team like Colorado who play a style that suits his game. We already saw Burakovsky go from a 25 point forward in Washington to a 64 point forward in Colorado. This seems like a pretty comparable situation.
EDIT: Just to clarify, I'm not against signing Tatar, I just think it's interesting to weigh up the two options. Tatar obviously would be convenient for not giving up assets and he'd be a nice fit as a playmaker next to Burakovsky and Kadri, but I do think there's a lot of validity to acquiring DeBrusk too.