Quote:
Originally Posted by The Cobra
I'm not particularly interested in either BoBo or Varmy , and Pepsi makes valid general points about players values, but I think he is way off base in that Bobo has been a horse that has played huge minutes and leading his team into the playoffs, while Varmy has played less and been injured often.
|
Sure, injuries are a factor. But over the last 5 years (including this season) Bob has only played 33 more games than Varlamov (248 vs 215). The difference between isn’t all that large. Over that time, just looking at basic SV%, Bob has an edge of .919 vs .915.
My argument is that looking at the situations they’ve played in over that stretch (including some of the factors I’ve previously mentioned, defensive situations, special teams, etc), Bob has benefitted from playing on a better, more defensively capable team. So much so, that if a team is choosing between the two, paying Bob a dime more than Varlamov would be a mistake.
The reason I brought this up months ago was the idea that Bob would require assets and 8+ million per. That’s a mistake. You can get Varlamov for less, and he gives you an equal or better chance to win.