TheNorth86
Registered User
- Nov 15, 2016
- 48
- 3
It is a coicidence, because nobody is scoring, including guys who never see ice time with Stamkos. This same exact team did just fine the last time he went down, if I recall. Was that a coincidence? That being said, I don't like that we have the exact same team that we did. Virtually everyone else in the East made moves and we did nothing. Hence this thread.
Racking up points? We're paying him to be THE guy, not to keep pace with the other guys. Great on the PK? You mean he jumped in on a couple of of 2-on-1s with Palat, an actual natural on the PK? Okay. Setting up goals for teammates? Kuch? There's a shocker. Good backcheck? I didn't really notice him, which, to be fair, probably bolsters your case. Limited TOs? It's embarrassing that this needs to be pointed out at all. It should be a given (and I'll refrain from pointing out a particularly embarrassing turnover early in the year against a particular player, no matter how ironic it is given the trade proposal we're debating).
Stamkos is underachieving would be my point. Why should he need a new 8.5 million dollar a year contract to work on his game? As an example, Ovechkin isn't anywhere close to the player he was when came into the league. He worked on improving his entire game while continuing to put up more goals than anyone else. If Stamkos worked half as hard to get his chances as Ovechkin does he'd be be potting 70 a year, every year. Seriously.
I don't necessarily think that "the player we don't have" is better than Stamkos. I just think that players we don't have could make our team better as a unit.
Could we all pay you to never post another opinion of your's ever again?