Yeah, but "reasonable" to you and reality are two different things, which of course you know perfectly well as you're setting yourself up to complain when Kessel does get signed.
I've explained many times already that I am a Leafs fan, not a Kessel fan. I don't mind Kessel, I think he's really good at what he does. But at the same time I am aware of what he doesn't do, and I believe both should be factored into making a valuation on his services. I admit I am entirely biased, because I'd rather see the Leafs prosper than the estate of Phil Kessel, so forgive me.
You're not getting one of the elite wingers in the game at age 25 signed for 6.5 million. It's not going to happen. If it did it would be the best contract this team has signed in a long long time but I doubt Phil is going to leave that kind of cash on the table.
It will cost between 7 and 8. If his 13/14 is anything like the previous two seasons, or better if the Leafs can upgrade on his centre, expect it closer to 8.
For a long-term deal I do believe Kessel can be had with a $6.5 million cap hit. Is that optimistic? I'm not so sure. We're talking an 8 year deal. A lot can happen in 8 years. Kessel makes his bacon off his speed, shot, and hands. Remove any of those from his game and he's not going to survive in this league unless he develops some sort of work ethic and round out his game. So at 6.5 x 8, that is 52 million.
A higher cap hit could be accommodated but I would expect the Leafs would respond by decreasing their long-term exposure to that cap hit by lowering the term of the contract. $7.5 x 6 ?
I'd like to hear what would be a better use of the money, if you don't think Kessel is worth it. Two lesser players that add up to the same dough? Like who?
I'm trying to call up Ray Shero right now...but I can't get past his secretary. I'll try and find out who is available around the league but it could take a while.
Problem with this guy is if you tell him CORSI sucks, he will just reply with a post full of more CORSI-sourced garbage.
If you then explain why CORSI sucks and is absolutely useless in the grand scheme of things, that will be ignored and instead more CORSI-sourced garbage will be hurled at you.
I mean just read all the lawyer-dodging the post....pretty obvious there's no good faith to debate with integrity.
Me: Why is a Grabovski spam shot from the top of the circle valued the same as a snipe goal from Phil Kessel under CORSI?
TCO: Grabovski doesn't spam shots...
I mean, really, I realize this isn't a MENSA meeting but I expected more than this...especially from someone with such unbridled faith in an invalid model.
He scores at a healthy 11% in the regular season, and had 7 more shot for than Kulemin in the regular season. Grabs didn't get to play with Kadri and Lupul unlike Kulemin.
CORSI sucks. You shouldn't use it for anything.
It is a lot better than the +/- metric. If we look at the quality of competition weighed by the opposition's relative CORSI, we'll see that it's pretty accurate. Obviously to measure the individual player's productivity, we'll use look at their CORSI in relation to linemates (rCORSI).
Backes, Bergeron, Staal, Steen, Zetterberg, will show up as productive against stiffer competition. It's not perfect, but it's a lot better than the observation from yahoos who will use +/- whenever it suits them. I can easily do the same.
Kessel = +3
Perry = 0
Koivu = -4
Kopitar = -2
Datsyuk = +2
These figures are worthless especially when we all know that Datsyuk is the best defensively amongst two-way forwards.
We are going to see Kessel get that $7.5-8 million per contract. It is worth it, and we're to be an interesting team to watch with our developing core. The Leafs administration understands this quite well.
Last edited by The_Chosen_One: 06-10-2013 at 03:51 AM.
If we look at the quality of competition weighed by the opposition's relative CORSI, we'll see that it's pretty accurate. Obviously to measure the individual player's productivity, we'll use look at their CORSI in relation to linemates (rCORSI).
You can do anything you want to the CORSI numbers, but it doesn't change that the original numbers suck.
You can make all those same adjustments to +/- ratings, and get a similar result.
I posed this question directly to him and he completely dodged it..
Shots Attempted For - Shots Attempted Against = CORSI
Since the Left Side of the equation is utter junk in terms of it's analytical usefulness, so to is the Right Side, since we are dealing with an equality.
Therefore since the differential CORSI is junk, so too are it's arithmetic rearrangements.
This is the kind of math they teach Canadians in early high school and it's being perverted here by people posing as statisticians.
If the left side of the equation is junk, why would goal differentials be any better? At least be consistent. There is a very large aspect of puck luck when it comes to goals. It explains why Shea Weber is a -2 despite being relied upon defensively.
In short, the idea is simple. On average, generating greater shots for especially against top competition is quite important in neutralizing their offence.
Considering that Grabovski has a sustainable scoring percentage and a reasonable shots total, Caryle's decision to place him on a shut down did seem quite logical. Bergeron who is a shut down forward produces similar in terms of having a positive CORSI differential against opposition lines with high CORSI values. However, he produces almost like a top liner, and for that reason we need to acquire our own Bergeron.
I think if we can acquire/ draft a Datsyuk/ Giroux-type player, we create a more productive shut down line. These kinds of lines tend to win cups.
I asked why, for example, a Phil Kessel snipe is valued the same as a Mikhail Grabovski spam shot.
Continuing along that path, why is a Phil Kessel snipe valued the same as a Dion Phaneuf point shot that sails over the net?
Why is a tremendous play equated with a garbage play? And why are the other four players on the ice awarded the same stat, all the same?
Do you really not see what a sad excuse for a model this is? Not sure how you got your ring without going through at least one math/stats class?
As opposed to your previous posts, please read, comprehend, and directly reply to the questions posed instead of avoiding them. Thank you.
Relatively speaking there is little difference between a quality snipe and a so called garbage goal. The only real difference i see is the player with the ability to quality snipe has a better odds chance of repeating higher scoring over their career.
The only way this guy would be traded is if the overpayment was so damn big that we couldn't refuse. I would only say this on the Leafs board, because other fans will rip it apart. But the Leafs management would not even consider trading Phil unless it meant:
top 6 proven winger or number 1 Center
top 5 pick/ or top prospect/ Young ready
Patrick Kane signed for 6.3 million after two point-per-game seasons. Why can't Kessel? They're quite comparable players in my mind (in terms of what they bring to their respective teams).
you have to look at a contract at the time it was signed.
kane signed a $6.3 million x 5 year contract in 2010
kessel signed a $5.4 million x 5 year contract in 2009
kessel's contract is up after one more season, kane's after two. i agree they are comparable players and likely will have similar type cap hits but neither will be $6.3 million. you can not expect kessel to sign for a similar contract to what kane signed 3 year previously, its just not realistic. id expect both to get at a minimum $7.5 million per