View Single Post
Old
09-24-2011, 10:35 PM
  #50
glovesave_35
Name
 
glovesave_35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Korea
Country: United States
Posts: 15,820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued View Post
Well if I were Phoenix, I would've certainly have been counting on at least 40 points.

Of course you've got a big stumbling block in the form of Tippett. We all know it's very difficult for young players to gain his trust and therefore icetime. Does Loui Eriksson become the player he is today if Tippett has his way?

Turris scored 2.30 PTS/60 5v5 last season, which led the Coyotes' entire team. Benn scored 2.40. And that was the regular season -- he clearly turned his game up several notches in the playoffs. To my eyes, he was the Coyotes' best player, slightly better than even Doan. He was playing the way we hope Benn will under the big lights.

A large part of this comparison concerns the comparative strength of the 2 teams. Phoenix is hoping a declining Langkow recaptures some of his old form and stays healthy. They're hoping an undersized undrafted college free agent can make the jump to productive NHLer. History says that will likely fail. Hanzal's a great checker, but he's just that. Turris is their only center that appears to be a legitimate offensive threat. Meanwhile, of course, we have Ribeiro.
But is Turris a legitimate offensive threat?

According to those numbers it would seem you think Turris is close to Benn in terms of putting up offense, or am I missing something? To me the question isn't how much a player scores per minute, it's how much they can score given max minutes. Theoretically, having a relatively high PTS/60 means you're better at scoring than someone with a lower split, but only if you can keep up that level of production with increased ice time, which includes better quality of defensive competition.

I feel like this thread has taken a left turn somewhere. If it became public knowledge that Benn was looking for a 4x4 contract like Turris supposedly is it would hardly be eyebrow-raising. With Turris it makes a person want to laugh. They're not even remotely comparable right now in terms of what they are on the ice and what they're worth, either in a vacuum or to their respective teams. Players comparable to Benn from a contract standpoint are the guys like JVR, Tavares and Couture. Turris hasn't even signed yet so he offers virtually nothing from a value comparison perspective.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hull Fan View Post
Bottom line Benn probably deserves 4 million in a long term deal that pays him more up front but makes it a great deal as he goes along just like Eriksson's contract. Six years $27 million and I'd be thrilled.
Why would a contract like that be structured to pay him more up front? If anything I'd imagine it would have an escalating salary, not the other way around.


Last edited by glovesave_35: 09-24-2011 at 10:42 PM.
glovesave_35 is offline   Reply With Quote