Quote:
Originally Posted by howard_the_duck
It’s just a more measured way to do a statistical analysis so you can reasonably forecast what to expect from the player moving forward.
+61 skews the data pretty significantly, and those players are obviously long gone.
|
"More measured"
I love it. Nice work. Performance is what is measurable.
Good players have good games and bad games. Good seasons and bad seasons. We all know what Lindholm is. It's been discussed here at length.
He's a top 30 player at his position in the world for easily the next 5 years barring injury. Why wouldn't you want to sign him, especially if there is a soft trade market for him?
I'm not a fan of 8 years as a term, and if I was Conroy I'd pay more dollars for less term. I'm of the mind that Lindholm @ 9x5 is a valuable asset for winning hockey games.
If it has to be 8 years, I'm glad it's not my call. Some team will give him 8x8, not because GMs are idiots, which people love to say, but isnt true, but because that is market value for his services.
Would Lindholm be into 9.5 or even 10 on a 1-year or 2-year deal? Playing with Huberdeau in an offense built around them might be a good opportunity