Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball
What the heck does that even mean? Nabby is a better penalty killer than Murray so that proves Murray is not worth 2.5m? That makes absolutely no sense. Comparing him with forwards on the PK is one thing, comparing him with the goalie is illogical. Basing his pay on his PK skills is also an unusual point since Murray is a very physical defensemen and the PK is the one place he cannot use that effectively (throwing hits on the PK is generally unusual). Besides that Murray plays big minutes on one of the league's best PK squads.
So Murray is undisputeably:
One of the top hitters in the league.
A very solid defensemen capable of playing #4 minutes.
Is a career +25 (and he's not sheltered)
More than able to throw down with the big boys if needed.
Plays big minutes on one of the best PK's in the league
And he's not worth 2.5m? I think almost any team in the league would love to have him at that price.
|
Mods, I'm not trying to be off topic. Just politely answering his question and I'll tie it back to Moore.
HB, I read that someone thinks Murray is a top tier PK player and thus deserving of his salary. All that I was pointing out was that he simply isn't. On another team, maybe. But this Sharks team, no. And if you want to know where I was getting at with Nabby. Your goalie is always your best PKer. They read the play, they make the saves. So, no...uh...its not illogical.
You can say lots of nice things about him, sure. I could, too. I'm sure we all could. But his skill set doesn't flatter him and his pay. His skating ability and speed is below average, and his stick skills are mediocre. If he was at least average in skating ability, I would retract my current opinion on his salary and instead say his salary was simply fair. If he was AO fast, I would say we totally got an awesome steal and should have instead signed him 8 years, 20mil. So, you kinda see how a well crafted skill set is a valuable thing and you can put a value on it?
There are players that are underpaid (Nichol, Malhotra), players that are overpaid to some degree or another (Huskins, Murray, Blake, Clowe), and some players are paid just right or just simply are amongst the best in the league at their position that it doesn't matter all that much cause they're worth every penny (Patty, Thornton, Boyle).
There are players that are more then willing to get paid less then what they're worth because they want to play the game on the team they're interested in and show that they are the puzzle pieces you've been looking for. Malhotra and Nichol are great examples of this. And it looks like Mike Moore is stepping into that category. Good for all of them. I like that they have that kind of confidence that they can be competitive to be on the NHL roster, deserve more pay, and they're willing to prove it by doing it out there on the ice. Players like this are great reasons why GMs should be more wise about signing players to contracts that they can't possibly meet the expectations of, yet. Especially when you're tight on the cap.
Quote:
|
U.R., you tell me that when guys are coming down against the likes of Keith and Seebrook, they don't keep their heads up?????
|
Thats not what I'm saying at all. All I was telling you is that you have the wrong idea about why the Hawks have a successful team. If you can't see that their success is with their Speed, Forward talent, Forecheck, and puck possession system then I don't know what to tell you other then just watch their games.
. pf takes every opportunity to put down Murray even when the threads not about him.
