HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Justin Schultz's contract

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-30-2014, 06:09 PM
  #551
SchultzSquared
Registered User
 
SchultzSquared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,933
vCash: 500
Andy Greene is what we think J Schultz may be... top pairing puck mover... he just got re upped to 5 X 5...

between that and the Gardiner deal I do not think his camp has any leverage for long term deal that is higher than 4.5 never mind 5... sucks for us I think because it means probably he refuses to sign a long deal... and only asks for a bridge to get the $70MM++ cap monies a couple years from now

SchultzSquared is offline  
Old
07-30-2014, 06:30 PM
  #552
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nihilist View Post
We're talking about a contract here, where a full body of work is being evaluated and awarded millions of dollars. Karlsson has a Norris Trophy. Schultz has 19 NHL goals and 41 assists to his name, nothing more. We're a basement team, and the GM should be extremely critical when it comes to contract renewals.
What does this have to do with the value of +/- as a key means of assessing a defenseman? Specifically how do you explain a -15 from a Norris trophy winner if that stat tells you all you need to know?

And by the way your answer to my question of which top pairing defenseman might sign a $5M long term deal is Andy Greene!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nihilist View Post
Typically, non-playoff teams will be overall negative, while playoff teams will be overall positive. Then guys who end up with the most ice time take the brunt of the damage.

But here's the thing. Nicklas Lidstrom started playing for Detroit Red Wings... and suddenly they went from being bottom half of the league, to top of the league for a long time.

Justin Schultz simply did not have that kind of impact on our team. We need players who will make that kind of impact for us. Now I know I know I know, it's not fair to compare him to one of the best defenders of all time. But which moves are going to be the ones that make us a positive team? Is signing Schultz for 8 years going to be the ticket when he suddenly figures out how to shut down Getzlaf and Kopitar??? I doubt it. We're going to need to bolster up the rest of the roster, and that's going to cost money which is going to have to be taken away from the contract Schultz could potentially otherwise earn.
This is the part where we see things differently. For me the danger in waiting to pay a guy what he is worth is that you will never have long-term value contracts since typically a player will only sign long term if they are in a strong bargaining position or if the team shows faith in them by paying more now for potential future value. I think your approach is actually more likely to limit future money for support players than a gamble on a longer contract now.

Take a look a Keith's deal. I am not talking about how much he deserved when he signed it but rather how important it is to Chicago right now to have him on a cost controlled deal. If he was up next year as well Chicago would have to completely dismantle their team to keep him with the deals that Kane and Toews signed. Looking at the Oilers cap structure going forward, it is clear that cap space this year or next is not a big issue. But a as you move forward and the team hopefully starts to compete you will want as much flexibility as possible.


Last edited by Fourier: 07-31-2014 at 07:22 AM.
Fourier is online now  
Old
07-30-2014, 06:37 PM
  #553
Nihilist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 409
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourier View Post
What does this have to do with the value of +/- as a key means of assessing a defenseman? Specifically how do you explain a -16 from a Norris trophy winner if that stat tells you all you need to know?

And by the way your answer to my question of which top pairing defenseman might sign a $5M long term deal is Andy Greene!
Like I said, it's just one of the many stats. Admittedly it's my favourite stat to use in evaluating the success of a defenceman. But even someone like Paul Coffey was a -18 in a season where he scored 93 points. He won a cup that year.

All I know, is that when I'm on the ice, and at the end of the day if I'm a plus player - I felt like I did my part. And if I'm a minus player and we lose? I take it very personally.

Nihilist is offline  
Old
07-30-2014, 07:24 PM
  #554
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nihilist View Post
Like I said, it's just one of the many stats. Admittedly it's my favourite stat to use in evaluating the success of a defenceman. But even someone like Paul Coffey was a -18 in a season where he scored 93 points. He won a cup that year.

All I know, is that when I'm on the ice, and at the end of the day if I'm a plus player - I felt like I did my part. And if I'm a minus player and we lose? I take it very personally.
You are not helping your case with +/- and Justin Schultz. Paul Coffey was a better defensive defenseman in 90-91 than he was in 82-83. Yet he put up a +52 in the latter and a -18 in the former.

Whether you believe in advanced stats or not many of the common ones have been constructed to overcome the obvious flaws in =/- as a stat. It simply does a terrible job isolating the player from the team in almost all circumstances.

Fourier is online now  
Old
07-30-2014, 08:00 PM
  #555
Nihilist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 409
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourier View Post
You are not helping your case with +/- and Justin Schultz. Paul Coffey was a better defensive defenseman in 90-91 than he was in 82-83. Yet he put up a +52 in the latter and a -18 in the former.

Whether you believe in advanced stats or not many of the common ones have been constructed to overcome the obvious flaws in =/- as a stat. It simply does a terrible job isolating the player from the team in almost all circumstances.
Well since we're talking about advanced stats, besides being a -22, his corsi is in loser territory too.

Don't get me wrong, I like Schultz, I understand advanced stats. I just think he should prove more before getting a long-term deal. I thought we were a bit pre-mature with pretty much everyone in the 6m club as a matter of fact. But what do I know? I don't run this team.

Nihilist is offline  
Old
07-31-2014, 07:19 AM
  #556
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nihilist View Post
Well since we're talking about advanced stats, besides being a -22, his corsi is in loser territory too.

Don't get me wrong, I like Schultz, I understand advanced stats. I just think he should prove more before getting a long-term deal. I thought we were a bit pre-mature with pretty much everyone in the 6m club as a matter of fact. But what do I know? I don't run this team.
For the record, I am not saying that I believe a stat like corsi says that much more than +/- about an individual's contributions. I think it is pretty well know around here that I am a skeptic with respect how they are often used to comment on a player. Most suffer from the same defects as +/- if possibly to varying degrees. The point was that many of the machinations we see happen because people actually recognize the limitations of the numbers.

Your last paragraph is the key here. They were premature in all those cases. That is precisely the point in the exercise. These are calculated gambles that are designed to give you a favourable cap structure in the future by allowing you cap space when you actually need it. You don't have to be right all the time for this to work because the downside risk is smaller than the potential upside gain in most cases.

If there was no cap then by all means pay a guy exactly what he has earned. But if you do that in a capped world your stars will eat up so much of your payroll that you will not have anything left to spend on quality complementary players. This is especially true under the new CBA since you can't artificially reduce the cap hit by tacking on a bunch of weasel years.

Fourier is online now  
Old
07-31-2014, 10:59 AM
  #557
Gambl0r83
Registered User
 
Gambl0r83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 188
vCash: 500
LOL. I saw this from the day he signed with us. Guy ditched the team that drafted him in a manner that embarrassed the franchise. That kind of character will always only look out for #1, himself. Not surprised at all, matter of fact, he's probably even asking for more than what Hall/RNH/Eb's are getting. Wouldn't be surprised either

But all in all, no matter how ****** his attitude is, how much money he wants, this kid has a special kind of talent that very few possess

Gambl0r83 is offline  
Old
07-31-2014, 11:50 AM
  #558
doulos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gambl0r83 View Post
But all in all, no matter how ****** his attitude is, how much money he wants, this kid has a special kind of talent that very few possess
Of letting opposing forwards skate past him and missing his assignments?

doulos is online now  
Old
07-31-2014, 12:22 PM
  #559
belair
Registered User
 
belair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gambl0r83 View Post
LOL. I saw this from the day he signed with us. Guy ditched the team that drafted him in a manner that embarrassed the franchise. That kind of character will always only look out for #1, himself. Not surprised at all, matter of fact, he's probably even asking for more than what Hall/RNH/Eb's are getting. Wouldn't be surprised either

But all in all, no matter how ****** his attitude is, how much money he wants, this kid has a special kind of talent that very few possess
What?

He utilized a loophole in the CBA that anyone could have used. For whatever reasons he decided he wanted to play for the Edmonton Oilers, not the Anaheim Ducks.

Since signing here he's meshed extremely well with our future core and has shown no signs of a poor attitude nor has he shown himself to be a 'me' player. Unfortunately he also hasn't shown himself to be a comparable to Andy Greene or whomever, so one would think that him meriting a paycheque anywhere near what Hall and Company have received is laughable.

belair is offline  
Old
07-31-2014, 01:08 PM
  #560
Draekke
Registered User
 
Draekke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by belair View Post
What?

He utilized a loophole in the CBA that anyone could have used. For whatever reasons he decided he wanted to play for the Edmonton Oilers, not the Anaheim Ducks.

Since signing here he's meshed extremely well with our future core and has shown no signs of a poor attitude nor has he shown himself to be a 'me' player. Unfortunately he also hasn't shown himself to be a comparable to Andy Greene or whomever, so one would think that him meriting a paycheque anywhere near what Hall and Company have received is laughable.
Ya... this is the response I was going to post as well. The complete opposite of what Gamblor was saying...

Draekke is offline  
Old
08-01-2014, 12:37 PM
  #561
HometownHockey
HFB Partner
 
HometownHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Windsor, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 364
vCash: 500
Justin Schultz is going to cost the Edmonton Oilers a pretty penny

Justin Schultz is going to cost the Edmonton Oilers a pretty penny



When the Toronto Maple Leafs and defenceman Jake Gardiner agreed to five year extension, many an Oiler fan felt Craig MacTavish had a fair comparable to use in his negotiations with blueliner Justin Schultz. While both play a very similar style of game and have many of the same shortcomings, there is one massive difference between the two that simply cannot be ignored.

READ MORE...
http://www.hometownhockey.ca/hockey/EDM0102.php

HometownHockey is offline  
Old
08-01-2014, 01:03 PM
  #562
Moose Coleman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,016
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OurHometown View Post
Justin Schultz is going to cost the Edmonton Oilers a pretty penny



When the Toronto Maple Leafs and defenceman Jake Gardiner agreed to five year extension, many an Oiler fan felt Craig MacTavish had a fair comparable to use in his negotiations with blueliner Justin Schultz. While both play a very similar style of game and have many of the same shortcomings, there is one massive difference between the two that simply cannot be ignored.

READ MORE...
http://www.hometownhockey.ca/hockey/EDM0102.php
First, it's disingenuous to say that he made $3.775 million during his first two years in the NHL.He would have had he hit his bonuses (IIRC he did so in year 1, but fell short in year 2)

Second: it matters not a lick how Schultz came to be an Oiler. He's an RFA, same as Gardiner, same as Kulikov etc. If he uses the argument that the Oilers overpaid him for his first two years and so he should continue to be overpaid, I don't think that will get him far.

Moose Coleman is offline  
Old
08-01-2014, 06:54 PM
  #563
seadawg
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 443
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moose Coleman View Post
First, it's disingenuous to say that he made $3.775 million during his first two years in the NHL.He would have had he hit his bonuses (IIRC he did so in year 1, but fell short in year 2)

Second: it matters not a lick how Schultz came to be an Oiler. He's an RFA, same as Gardiner, same as Kulikov etc. If he uses the argument that the Oilers overpaid him for his first two years and so he should continue to be overpaid, I don't think that will get him far.
I completely and wholeheartedly agree with your assessment. It is completely bogus to argue that because Schultz signed as a Free Agent he is thereby entitled to more money. That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. He has the same leverage as Gardiner and any other player coming off his first NHL contract. He doesn't have arbitration rights and he won't be a UFA until Gardiner would have been a UFA, so his situation is exactly the same as Gardiner's and his expectations should be also.

seadawg is offline  
Old
08-01-2014, 07:19 PM
  #564
doulos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seadawg View Post
I completely and wholeheartedly agree with your assessment. It is completely bogus to argue that because Schultz signed as a Free Agent he is thereby entitled to more money. That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. He has the same leverage as Gardiner and any other player coming off his first NHL contract. He doesn't have arbitration rights and he won't be a UFA until Gardiner would have been a UFA, so his situation is exactly the same as Gardiner's and his expectations should be also.
The seadawg is wise...

doulos is online now  
Old
08-01-2014, 08:01 PM
  #565
s7ark
Moderator
TheWorstEver
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,190
vCash: 500
Watching a prime example of how bad a forced bridge deal can go unfold right before our eyes in Montreal is really making me hope MacT will offer Schultz a reasonable $ deal for 5+ years. Show some faith in the kid and lock him up. The PP won't be as bad this season and Schultz will benefit from that a lot. He isn't going to be cheap to sign in 2 years. Just get it done.

s7ark is offline  
Old
08-02-2014, 01:42 AM
  #566
nexttothemoon
The Drive for Nine
 
nexttothemoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
There will be an "Edmonton premium" built into Schultz's contract... as well as a "reward premium" for him signing in Edmonton vs 29 other teams that he could have signed with instead.

Its also a valid comparable that Hall/Eberle/RNH all signed to $6 million contracts based in large part on forward-looking potential.

If Schultz signs for anything less than $5 million (for any term length) I'll be very surprised. I'm still expecting $5+ million over 5+ years but if it is a short term 1-2 year deal... I still doubt it would be for under $5 million per year.

nexttothemoon is online now  
Old
08-02-2014, 02:09 AM
  #567
Shanahanigans
Registered User
 
Shanahanigans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
Watching a prime example of how bad a forced bridge deal can go unfold right before our eyes in Montreal is really making me hope MacT will offer Schultz a reasonable $ deal for 5+ years. Show some faith in the kid and lock him up. The PP won't be as bad this season and Schultz will benefit from that a lot. He isn't going to be cheap to sign in 2 years. Just get it done.
Totally disagree here. Subban was a borderline top pairing Dman in the last year of his ELC, if not a true top pairing one. Everyone knew he was worth (at the time) at least 5 mill, but MTL decided to play hardball. He was tracking well to becoming the dominant top pairing DMan he is today. He has a shot that Schultz will never have, he's much better in his own zone, more physical, more involved, etc. Schultz is just a good skater with a lot of puck skills, offensive skills, and a good wrist shot. But he still hasn't proven much in the NHL. He's an average 2nd pair guy, and probably will only become a good 2nd pair offensive Dman. And that's good, the team needs that. But it means that Subban should not be used as a comparable.

Shanahanigans is offline  
Old
08-02-2014, 11:57 AM
  #568
OiledUp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shanahanigans View Post
Totally disagree here. Subban was a borderline top pairing Dman in the last year of his ELC, if not a true top pairing one. Everyone knew he was worth (at the time) at least 5 mill, but MTL decided to play hardball. He was tracking well to becoming the dominant top pairing DMan he is today. He has a shot that Schultz will never have, he's much better in his own zone, more physical, more involved, etc. Schultz is just a good skater with a lot of puck skills, offensive skills, and a good wrist shot. But he still hasn't proven much in the NHL. He's an average 2nd pair guy, and probably will only become a good 2nd pair offensive Dman. And that's good, the team needs that. But it means that Subban should not be used as a comparable.
I agree that Schultz in all likelyhood ends up a 2nd pairing guy. But I also think it's likely that he has a season in the next couple of years where he really hits his stride offensively, putting up big numbers, especially considering the number of great PP players we got. Since you often tend to pay a premium for the boys who puts up the big offensive digits there's a risk we end up brutally overpaying Schultz going forward.
With Subban you at least get an elite guy. The comparable is valid since I think Schultz could put up similar points to PK on a good year while he's a way worse overall player, but since defensive skills are much harder to quantify we run the risk of really overpaying. He won't get Subban money, at least he shouldn't but in two years with a higher cap, who knows, and then we're in trouble.

In the case of Subban I think Habs just keeps making mistakes by playing hardball, PKs value is getting higher by the season and so is the cap. He won't ask for less in a year.

OiledUp is offline  
Old
08-02-2014, 12:28 PM
  #569
s7ark
Moderator
TheWorstEver
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shanahanigans View Post
Totally disagree here. Subban was a borderline top pairing Dman in the last year of his ELC, if not a true top pairing one. Everyone knew he was worth (at the time) at least 5 mill, but MTL decided to play hardball. He was tracking well to becoming the dominant top pairing DMan he is today. He has a shot that Schultz will never have, he's much better in his own zone, more physical, more involved, etc. Schultz is just a good skater with a lot of puck skills, offensive skills, and a good wrist shot. But he still hasn't proven much in the NHL. He's an average 2nd pair guy, and probably will only become a good 2nd pair offensive Dman. And that's good, the team needs that. But it means that Subban should not be used as a comparable.

It's easy to look back with hindsight and say that those calling PK a top pairing D after his ELC were right. But at the time of the deal there were plenty of Habs fans arguing for a bridge deal because he hadn't proven himself yet. Rumour has it PK wanted to sign a 10yr 50M deal. How good would that look for the Habs right now?

A lot can happen to a player Schultz's age in two years. In two years we could be kicking ourselves for forcing Schultz in to a bridge deal. Just like the Habs are now. Hab fans are sick with worry that they've pissed off PK enough at this point that he may just play out two more years there then walk. Possibly to the Leafs.

If MacT thinks that Schultz can be a 40p+ D with average+ D skills, within the next 2-3 years, then it's in the team's best interest to lock him up now.

s7ark is offline  
Old
08-02-2014, 02:43 PM
  #570
s7ark
Moderator
TheWorstEver
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,190
vCash: 500
PK just signed an 8 year 9M per deal. So when we take the 2 year bridge into account, PK signed for 10 years for 77.75M. Before the bridge he offered to sign 10 years for 50M.

That bridge sure saved the Habs money didn't it? But at least they played it safe and didn't want to risk overpaying a young kid based on potential because he hadn't proven himself yet. Good call there.

s7ark is offline  
Old
08-02-2014, 03:09 PM
  #571
doulos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
PK just signed an 8 year 9M per deal. So when we take the 2 year bridge into account, PK signed for 10 years for 77.75M. Before the bridge he offered to sign 10 years for 50M.

That bridge sure saved the Habs money didn't it? But at least they played it safe and didn't want to risk overpaying a young kid based on potential because he hadn't proven himself yet. Good call there.
Wonder if the Sabres enjoy paying Tyler Myers 5 more years at 5.5 million. Sometimes the risky deals blow up on you as well.

Then you have a guy like Marcus Johansson who seems to have a bridge deal that works well for both sides.

You can't just spew out an extreme example like Subban and think that it applies to everyone.

doulos is online now  
Old
08-02-2014, 03:17 PM
  #572
s7ark
Moderator
TheWorstEver
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doulos View Post
Wonder if the Sabres enjoy paying Tyler Myers 5 more years at 5.5 million. Sometimes the risky deals blow up on you as well.

Then you have a guy like Marcus Johansson who seems to have a bridge deal that works well for both sides.

You can't just spew out an extreme example like Subban and think that it applies to everyone.
Too early to say with Johansson. He hasn't signed his post bridge deal yet. Next summer when he's RFA we'll see how much he signs for.

Myers looks to be turning his game around again and even if he doesn't improve any more, in 2-3 years 5.5 will be an average salary for a top 4 D, which he most assuredly is.

I am not saying Schultz is the next PK. But we shouldn't assume that he couldn't be either. No one thought Subban would win a Norris when he signed his bridge deal either. Young super skilled players can surprise. And even if Schultz tops out at a 40p PP specialist that can play top 4 minutes, in 2 years 5.5-6 isn't out of the question. Why not offer it to him now for a longer term? At most we over pay him by 1M-2M over the first couple of years on the deal, and he's on a reasonable contract after that. And if Schultz does break out, we have a potential steal of a contract on our hands like Hall's

s7ark is offline  
Old
08-02-2014, 03:24 PM
  #573
Spawn
Registered User
 
Spawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,568
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
Too early to say with Johansson. He hasn't signed his post bridge deal yet. Next summer when he's RFA we'll see how much he signs for.

Myers looks to be turning his game around again and even if he doesn't improve any more, in 2-3 years 5.5 will be an average salary for a top 4 D, which he most assuredly is.

I am not saying Schultz is the next PK. But we shouldn't assume that he couldn't be either. No one thought Subban would win a Norris when he signed his bridge deal either. Young super skilled players can surprise. And even if Schultz tops out at a 40p PP specialist that can play top 4 minutes, in 2 years 5.5-6 isn't out of the question. Why not offer it to him now for a longer term? At most we over pay him by 1M-2M over the first couple of years on the deal, and he's on a reasonable contract after that. And if Schultz does break out, we have a potential steal of a contract on our hands like Hall's
The worst case is most certainly more risky than you are suggesting. Worst case scenario is you offer it to him now and he continues to be a disaster in his own zone and you are paying 5-6 million for a guy who should be on the bottom pairing and can't play suitable defense. That's far more likely than he explodes and wins a Norris like Subban did.

Spawn is offline  
Old
08-02-2014, 03:27 PM
  #574
Up the Irons
Registered User
 
Up the Irons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,485
vCash: 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
PK just signed an 8 year 9M per deal. So when we take the 2 year bridge into account, PK signed for 10 years for 77.75M. Before the bridge he offered to sign 10 years for 50M.

That bridge sure saved the Habs money didn't it? But at least they played it safe and didn't want to risk overpaying a young kid based on potential because he hadn't proven himself yet. Good call there.
its a gamble they took, but they kind of win both ways. If Subban hadn't of worked out, then they'l look smart. He did work out, it costs them more, but they know they have a Norris trophy winning Dman with a superstar persona.

Quote:
Originally Posted by doulos View Post
Wonder if the Sabres enjoy paying Tyler Myers 5 more years at 5.5 million. Sometimes the risky deals blow up on you as well.

Then you have a guy like Marcus Johansson who seems to have a bridge deal that works well for both sides.

You can't just spew out an extreme example like Subban and think that it applies to everyone.
and Myers had proven more, at the time, than anything Schultz has to this point. Schultz simply hasn't proven jack s--t to warrant a cent more than 4.5 x 5. About the only thing he's shown is he's probably a decent point producer, and probably not a top pairing D.

Up the Irons is offline  
Old
08-02-2014, 03:28 PM
  #575
s7ark
Moderator
TheWorstEver
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spawn View Post
The worst case is most certainly more risky than you are suggesting. Worst case scenario is you offer it to him now and he continues to be a disaster in his own zone and you are paying 5-6 million for a guy who should be on the bottom pairing and can't play suitable defense. That's far more likely than he explodes and wins a Norris like Subban did.
You really think Schultz is going to top out as a bottom pairing PP specialist like MAB or something? I really don't see that as a reasonable future at all. I guess we'll just have to disagree. He's better than that now imo.

If MacT thinks like you and that there is a better chance that Schultz ends up a MAB clone than a top pairing puck moving D, then he's better off trading him right now, while he still has good value around the league. But, I don't think many in the Oilers organization would agree with you that Schultz is likely going to top out as a bottom pairing D.

s7ark is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:52 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.