-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Samuel Culper III
Mr. Woodhull...
Greene, Coburn, Leddy, Wisniewski, Streit, Enstrom, Fowler (how about more than 40 good games?), Franson over Phaneuf are beyond the realm of absolute jokes. You clearly have an irrational hate of Phaneuf and aren't basing this on play. Due to age/overall game guys like Boyle and Seidenberg are questionable as well (if you made a poll on the main board Dion would be valued over everyone I've mentioned so far, I have no doubt). Bieksa is questionable. Martin, Campbell, Bouwmeester, Johnson and Shattenkirk are as well. Even Seabrook and Yandle are questionable. Taking a rookie Jones may be true eventually but is kind of ridiculous at this stage. Especially when you arbitrarily leave out other rookies and young dmen who are looking just as good and have similar pedigree.
That leaves you with Suter, Weber, Keith, Karlsson, Subban, Chara, McDonagh, Letang, OEL, Seabrook, Pietrangelo, Doughty, Kronwall as your clear cut superior dmen. I included Seabrook and I'll add 5 more, since I listed so many guys as questionable. That comes out to 18. Even if we add another 5 for guys who you may have missed that comes to 23. There's really very little arguing that Phaneuf is in the top 20-30 dmen in this league. If you'd like to go on hating him, that's fine. But hating a player and that player not being good do not correlate. I hate Getzlaf and Giroux and Couture. I don't try to argue they're overrated and not as good as guys they're clearly better than.
Who cares? You said you would take those guys over Phaneuf? Campbell? He makes 7 mil too.
Dion is a classic case of "#1 on a bad team, #2 on a good team"
See: Marc Staal
P.S. : Thank god for McD
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Right. A #2 on a good team isn't a top 20 D guy in a 30 team league. Someone gets it.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
No, I don't. Please go bad to my original post which CLEARLY addresses the contract as being terrible because Phaneuf isn't a 7 year/7 million per player. He isn't. Comparable value-wise, I'd much rather have Enstrom, Fowler, Green, Coburn, Leddy, etc... No question about it.
Phaneuf has done nothing to impress me over the past 5 years. Nothing. And certainly not at a 7/7 deal. Just a deal I would never make. No irrational hate here, I just don't think he's a great player. Certainly not top 20, and not even close to guys like Seabrook, Shattenkirk, Campbell, Jaybo, etc... that you think are "questionable".
If the Rangers signed Phaneuf as a free agent for 7x7, this board would be overflowing with how stupid Sather is and comparing it to another Redden deal.
For those of you that are railing against this, you do realize that only THREE defenseman in the entire league are making more than that per year, right? Weber, Campbell, and Suter. And not by a lot. Doughty is making the same.
So Phaneuf is being paid more than guys like Chara, Keith and Seabrook.
It's a TERRIBLE contract.
Bringing Campbell into the mix is just a joke. Bouwmeester too. Redden is a totally different player and has nothing to do with this.
Kane One
Registered User
See Marc Staal? He would be a #1 on a good team if he didn't keep getting injured.
People are bashing the Phaneuf contract just based off his on-ice play. Let's not forget the guy is also their captain, #1 defenseman and leader in the room. Those "intangibles" all count for something.
Just ask Chris Drury
Just ask Chris Drury
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
We clearly have different ideas about what those players bring to a team and what Phaneuf does. Bouwmeester has been playing for sad sack franchises his entire career. Now that he's playing for a contender, he's a force. Campbell's a little older, but he's won a Cup and people forget about his Buffalo years. He's averaging over .5/ppg in his career which is pretty impressive in this league as a D.
Both are comparable to Phaneuf and neither is a "joke".
And what about Phaneuf? He played on cup teams his whole life or something?
And what about Phaneuf and his good years? You bring up Campbell's life story but ignore Phaneufs?Campbell never put up 60 points, Phaneuf did. Bouwmeester didnt either. Why bring up their life stories but ignore Phaneuf's?
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Shamelessly stolen from Toronto's HF discussion of his contract:
"Btw here is 2010-13 (3 year) data for the top 72 NHL defenseman (3000+ 5v5 mins) in 5v5 TOI. Unfortunately Hockey Analysis doesn't include this season for multi-year data (there's no 2010-14 or 2011-14 option available on the site). So that 3 year sample doesn't include this season.
http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rati...T&sortdir=DESC
Dion Phaneuf is ranked 50th/72 in goal differential. He ranks 30th/72 in Defensive Zone Start % (DZFO%) and 63rd/72 in Offensive Zone Start % (OZFO%). You could make the argument that Dion Phaneuf is asked to take on a lot of defensive assignments. But sure let's give 50m+/7yrs to a guy whom we're going to assume is a Top 10 defenseman in the league (after all we're gonna pay him like one). Without a shred of evidence that he's actually capable of being that guy over a long-term sample...
Let him walk. I don't care if he's a UFA and if he can get a better deal with some **** team. I don't care if it's going to take some time for us to groom or acquire an adequate replacement. Dion Phaneuf is not a part of a Stanley Cup winning puzzle. So what if we make the playoffs? Half of the conference makes the playoffs. Big deal. In the playoffs, a team can always get lucky and win a Stanley Cup. 16-28 games is a small sample size compared to 82. But we want to maximize the team's chances of winning a cup."
That's pretty telling.
"Btw here is 2010-13 (3 year) data for the top 72 NHL defenseman (3000+ 5v5 mins) in 5v5 TOI. Unfortunately Hockey Analysis doesn't include this season for multi-year data (there's no 2010-14 or 2011-14 option available on the site). So that 3 year sample doesn't include this season.
http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rati...T&sortdir=DESC
Dion Phaneuf is ranked 50th/72 in goal differential. He ranks 30th/72 in Defensive Zone Start % (DZFO%) and 63rd/72 in Offensive Zone Start % (OZFO%). You could make the argument that Dion Phaneuf is asked to take on a lot of defensive assignments. But sure let's give 50m+/7yrs to a guy whom we're going to assume is a Top 10 defenseman in the league (after all we're gonna pay him like one). Without a shred of evidence that he's actually capable of being that guy over a long-term sample...
Let him walk. I don't care if he's a UFA and if he can get a better deal with some **** team. I don't care if it's going to take some time for us to groom or acquire an adequate replacement. Dion Phaneuf is not a part of a Stanley Cup winning puzzle. So what if we make the playoffs? Half of the conference makes the playoffs. Big deal. In the playoffs, a team can always get lucky and win a Stanley Cup. 16-28 games is a small sample size compared to 82. But we want to maximize the team's chances of winning a cup."
That's pretty telling.
Dion's new contract will take up less cap % than his old one is right now...
Also no t really sure how you are meant to compare his new contract to one's signed under the old CBA (massively front loaded, with dead years at the end etc) or with a much smaller salary cap. You can't really judge it until you see what the next crop of UFAs and beyond make
Also no t really sure how you are meant to compare his new contract to one's signed under the old CBA (massively front loaded, with dead years at the end etc) or with a much smaller salary cap. You can't really judge it until you see what the next crop of UFAs and beyond make
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
I specifically said that Phaneuf's "last 5 years" haven't impressed me. Go back to the last page and have a look.
I think Phaneuf has been declining for years. Hence, I wouldn't sign him to that deal.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
And, just for the record, I'm not saying Phaneuf is a terrible hockey player or anything. I just don't think he's worth that type of money or term. I wouldn't want him on the Rangers for that and I wouldn't want Danny G for north of 6 million either. Weber, Suter, Chara, Keith, Doughty, etc.... for 7/7? Sure. Phaneuf? No.
I'm not a huge fan of Phaneuf. I can understand the thought that locking him up for seven years at seven million is too much.
However, with the cap expected to rise dramatically and a seven (or eight) year term limit, you aren't going to come close to a player like Weber, Suter, Keith, or Doughty at $7m as a UFA.
Watching the Leafs lose to the Bruins last playoffs reinforced what I knew about Phaneuf even before that.
It may be very true that the Leafs would miss him if they let him go after this season, but he already reached his plateau and was never a well rounded defenceman. What he provided the Leafs on offense, he often negated by making big blunders defensively. I don't watch the Leafs a lot, but if anything, his offensive game is reportedly not as good as it was.
It may be very true that the Leafs would miss him if they let him go after this season, but he already reached his plateau and was never a well rounded defenceman. What he provided the Leafs on offense, he often negated by making big blunders defensively. I don't watch the Leafs a lot, but if anything, his offensive game is reportedly not as good as it was.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Yeah, I guess. Still, 10% of my (projected) cap for a guy like Phaneuf with 19 other roster spots to fill? Not if I'm a GM.
The Gloaming
23
- Status
