View Single Post
Old
03-11-2013, 04:09 PM
  #13
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: hong kong
Posts: 34,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HankyZetts View Post
I'm not praising myself, take it easy there, Kriss. Everyone wants a long-term deal, but at what cost?
You said you were able to see flaws that many other fans can't see. That sounds like praising to me.
That's my point, what was the cost here? What truly were the risk of PK signing long term. Did you actually think PK wasn't worth investing many years at 4.5M??
You think he would have signed the deal, not play up to par to the point where people are complaining that he's making 4.5??
That was the whole point, the risk of investing in PK was as sure a bet as for any other promising youngster. Well worth the risk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HankyZetts View Post
How do you know that? You can only go by what you see and PK left a lot to be desired, considering his talent. Everyone knew he was already a very good player with a lot of potential, but to deserve the big money long term he still had/has more to prove. The way he's playing right now, if he had played like that last year without Markov's influence and on a crappy team, I would have a different opinion. He's now showing his real potential, on a good team in a great system. Still has a ways to go, but MB handled it perfectly so far.
Why did he have more to prove? Considering you're saying yourself you already knew he was at the very least a ''very good player with a lot of potential'', and may I add ''that had already proven capable of effectively handling top opponents, and play in every situation''. I mean, what else did he need to prove? That he can be part of the top players on the NHL??? Okay, well if that's the case, then expect him to get around 7-8M. He was allegedly asking for 4.5M, money well worth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HankyZetts View Post
Do you know what the word "relative" means? He still possesses good instincts, but relative to the guys we were arguing about in the other thread, he is lacking in that department. And that is the most important department. Ok?
Maybe you should phrase things differently then.
I don't think any other Dman in the NHL has the offensive vision of Karlsson, but I'm not gonna say they're lacking some.
You think those guys have more hockey IQ than PK, ok, but that's not him lacking any. I also disagree.
PK takes more risk than some of these guys because of style, but I don't think he has much to envy in terms of hockey sense. The kid reads plays very well.
He needs to improve on certain decisions, that's only normal, but I don't think he is lacking anything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HankyZetts View Post
Ok Kriss, I get it. Every time he has a good stretch you will be here trumpeting "I told you so" as if I didn't already believe PK was a very good player with a high ceiling. Bravo.

Would you like a mulligan on your opinion of OEL, or do you still believe PK is better? Or is that too shallow and desperate of me?
I'm not trumpeting anything. I simply stated that he was a risk well worth taking, but apparently not to you, and for reasons that didn't make any sense.

As for OEL, I never said PK was better, I said they were on par and that advanced stat showed he actually did better than OEL (stats can change on a yearly basis, and they can also be influenced by the team you play on). You said OEL was clearly better and that it wasn't even close.
So, don't put words in my mouth. I said they were on par, both having stronger/weaker qualities than the other.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote