Quote:
Originally Posted by IgiTang
Thats fair, if you completely ignore his entire body of work. If you look at Emelin's numbers pre-NHL, they are very close to Nak's.
As an agent, I would argue that his entire body of work needs to be considered because the organization chose to not play him. It is not Nakladal's fault the organization had to see what else they had in their vets. Nak's has also displayed that if there is a log jam, he can be brought in at any point and play at a high level.
I see where youre coming from tho, i just think an argument could be made either way but you have to consider what he could get as a UFA.
As a UFA, I could see a team throwing 1.5-2M over 2 years easily. Why not us?
You cant look at as "we need the cap to sign our other guys" perspective, you need to look at it from Nakladal's perspective. Especially since he didnt even get a chance to show what hes worth for most of the season.
|
I see your point about the body of work, my only contention is the shorter window to assess how well it has translated to the NHL. Looking at the AHL numbers we can see his game has translated well to the smaller ice, but with so few NHL games (and yes, this is not his fault) it is hard to be as certain he is worth a bigger commitment. He is the definition of an "under the radar" signing that a GM tries to pull off, which would either look like genius or be a mistake to bury.
Player decisions regarding value cannot be made in a vacuum - this is why his value to the Flames may have to be closer to 1M, but another organization without significant money tied up in its 5-7D may see him as worth the risk at closer to 2M
Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between our two positions?
Good debate though - glad this isn't going Lou vs Pat!