Quote:
Originally Posted by TheScorpion
Everyone's opinions are influenced by observation bias. Mine included. But do you have any evidence to support your argument that Monahan appears to be regressing faster than Backlund?
Monahan is in the midst of his worst production season ever and he's basically neck-and-neck with Backlund. He's six years younger and signed for a million dollars more. I think there's a lot more evidence to support the idea that Monahan could easily rebound (and provide good value) than there is to reinforce Backlund's case.
I think, with Monahan, a lot of people's disillusionment has been borne out of what he's been in the past and the expectations that have come with that. But, in terms of points, Backlund's best offensive seasons have only really matched Monahan's worst output. And we're getting to the point where Backlund's underlyings have regressed, suggesting his production might not be long for this league.
And I would never suggest Gawdin could replace Backlund. I'm not really a fan of Gawdin's NHL potential.
|
Let me make this a bit clearer - Monahan is 'regressing' just as much as Backlund is 'regressing' - and if you understand where I am coming from, my point is that Backlund is NOT regressing, so therefore neither is Monahan.
I do worry about Monahan's wrists (or whatever his injury may be that he is playing through). If you notice my posts, I don't think I have disparaged Monahan, or felt the need to trade him. I think he will bounce-back.
With that being said, what do you mean that Monahan is more likely to bounce-back than Backlund? Backlund doesn't need to bounce back. Backlund has 27 points in 44 games playing tough minutes trying to shut-down the other team and playing with a revolving cast of line mates. He is producing well, and is even being more leaned on by Darryl. He is not a 'bounce-back' candidate because he does not need to 'bounce back' at all.
That's where this argument differs. Whatever this team is going through, Backlund is the least of the issues here. Losing him would be a huge blow. Now you are having to utilize Monahan and Lindholm in a more shut-down role, and having to use other players to soak up those minutes. Suddenly you have to retain Ryan, since the Flames already traded Bennett away, so there won't be anyone to hold down the 3rd line centre position, and makes line matching more difficult.
I can not disagree enough that Backlund is 'regressing'. That's the point I am trying to make.
Comparing Monahan and Backlund head to head is kind of beside the point - they are deployed differently, and expectations are different. You aren't playing Backlund his entire contract to produce points, but rather you pay him what he makes because he helps your team all over the ice. Making a comparison from a goal/dollar or point/dollar is way to simplistic of a model to properly analyze (much less fairly analyze) the two players. I don't understand why you would approach it this way.