- Feb 18, 2018
- 3,936
- 6,522
Agree with that completely just that Caps should pay $4-$4.25M because everyone has taken a discountI have no idea what you’re saying here. It’s not hard to define his value, at least IMO. He makes guys hurt. He makes guys run away. He separates men from the puck and from their A-game. He causes turnovers all over the ice. Plus he has some hands, strong D/PK skills, and hockey sense enough to play on the top line opposite the greatest LW of all time. He’s a rare player in this league because of that combo. He’s valuable, not only to the Caps but to any team. And he should get paid in the $4-5M range if he gives up UFA years.
See? Easy.
4 CAPITALS ACCUSED OF RAPE(Why won't the Caps retire Stevens' number?)
Yeah. It’s this. Just not a difference-maker for long enough for this franchise.I don’t think Ted Gives a ****.
The guy wasn’t a Capital long enough IMO. Played more elsewhere by a large margin than in D.C. I loved Stevens when he was here but he means nothing really as a former Cap.
Wilson's 35 points last year were almost all at even strength which puts him 7th on the team in the stat, right ahead of Orlov and just behind a surging Eller (and somewhat sagging, injured Oshie). If we're talking Orlov money as being crazy, and TW is outscoring Orlov despite playing 50% fewer minutes, then we're also acknowledging that defenders are valued for more than points, yes? Even an offensively talented/oriented one like Orlov? So why wouldn't that standard be applied to a forward, in particular one that the rest of the league knows is a gamechanging force on the ice, who has proven his ability to elevate the top line in the league to championship status?
Re: Laich comparisons, Laich was 28yrs old and an established 20 goal guy right up until his 6 year contract before the injuries hit. He only played 9 games the following season, then 51 and 66 his last 2 years as a Cap. His contract term was long and he got hurt. It's also not the only example in history of something like that happening.
But why focus on that, except to paint a negative picture?
Nobody in history has ever doubled goals every 2 years in his early 20s and continued to develop as a top line forward? How do people propose the Caps negotiate with the Wilson camp, by saying "we don't think he's proven anything, and we aren't going to pay for a guy we think might be the next Brooks Laich". Yeah that'll go over well.
I agree about the Laich comparisons, they're mostly unfounded, as Wilson is only 24 years old.
Are you a politician? You could have easily said that in a quarter of the space you used up. You pretty much rip Wilson and say you arent a hater. It doesnt look like you are a fan.First of all, Wilson's not universally well-liked or respected by players, coaches, and hockey media outside of DC. Far from it. Just as much criticism and outright hatred as there is begrudging respect and gung-ho support. And that's being generous. So I don't think that poll would turn out the way you're implying. (I think you're right, but the majority of the people you're saying we should ask are folks that think Tom should go **** himself.)
Secondly, we were 2-1 without him during the suspension. His line didn't struggle offensively or defensively without him (they were actually a little better off in both categories). Small sample, sure, but also crucial games versus top-shelf competition.
And before you throw another "You're a Wilson hater!" post at me, I'm honestly a huge fan, hope he stays forever, and wish we could clone him. All I'm saying is that this idea people seem to have about Tom Wilson being transformative on our top line just doesn't prove out. He holds his own, adds a couple worthwhile elements, and drafts well off a couple superstars. But there are no statistics that indicate that he's a boon to that line offensively or defensively. He costs them a little offensively and offsets it with his physical prowess and doggedness in both ends.
It's a wash, but one that serves a purpose. I think the team's performance in those games during the suspension probably had a "Let's win it for Tom!" vibe akin to how they played without Backstrom. And there's real value to that camaraderie in a sport whose championship is won largely via that brotherhood and bunker mentality.
But the "he creates space" and "he's worth 5m all day long and more soon" stuff is overstated. He's certainly not a passenger on our top line, but his contributions there aren't all that mind-blowing, either.
I never did hear what the final verdict was on this matter. Incidents like this are tough. Did it really happen? Or is it someone trying to get money out if high profile athletes. It wouldn't be the first time it happened.
I never did hear what the final verdict was on this matter. Incidents like this are tough. Did it really happen? Or is it someone trying to get money out if high profile athletes. It wouldn't be the first time it happened.
I noticed. I have to stop for a coffee break halfway through every time I read one of his posts.Jags never met a wall of text he disliked writing lol!
I said it would probably be 3.75M-4M.
My issues come from a lot of the rationalizations people are making about TW's value.
I think Wilson is only worth 4 mil per season. I love his game. Love what he brings to the team but I just dont see him being a 5 mil player. Not yet anyway.And those people agree with the pricetag you're putting on him. There are people in the thread saying things like "5m all day long" and "he'll be worth 7 in a couple years." And a couple people are responding with, "That's a little much. Here are some reasons I lean more toward 4m than 5+." And those are critical things because that's how you justify paying a guy less.
Then it's, "Those are NEGATIVE things! Tom is awesome! You're a hater! Your reasons to pay him 4m are dumb. Only MY reasons to pay him 4m make any sense!" It's a lot of quibbling over nothing.
Jags never met a wall of text he disliked writing lol!
I post about once every other day, only when I feel strongly about something. Replies get wordy when I feel misunderstood or compelled to defend a point. I apologize if that bugs you. I'll work on it.