How to measure and gauge how athletes age is one of the trickiest parts of the job of a GM in any sport. In point of fact, I would say that it is almost impossible to do accurately and scientifically which is why so many long term contracts to athletes signed at about age 30 turn out to be failures. The reason why is it is because he are talking here about genetics more than anything.
Perhaps when you have an athlete under contract you can administer tests that show speed and reaction time, build a baseline assessment, and measure how an athlete measures up to that year after year is possible. But for free agents, this would seem impossible to do. You don't have access to that kind of data. For us fans, all we have is eye-ball performance: trying to access what he see by seasonal performance year after year. If a guys stats deteriorate after age 30, more likely than not he is aging and how quickly he ages is genetic determined. Perhaps the only position he can measure somewhat scientifically is baseball pitcher. If a guy threw at 92 mph at age 28, 90 at age 30, and 88 at age 32 and is injury free, that is aging. But how do you do that in hockey? You can measure speed and reaction time, but only with your own guys.
So here we have BR, who was always one of my favorite non-Ranger players. BR always had the reputation of being the consummate professional: a gym rat totally dedicated to the game, and a guy who performed well even when he had a big contract. He was always just quick enough to maximize his A+ skills: superior hockey smarts, excellent on-ice vision, and the ability to make great tape-to-tape passes. Aging has cost him that quickness. He was not the same player last year as he was in Dallas. He is not the same player this year he was last year. What will the future bring? He may plateau and be able to perform at the same level he did this year in the future, or he very well may get worse. Why can some pitchers maintain their velocity well into their 30s and other can't? It's impossible to know because genetics determine all and it is impossible to measure.
As I said, I have always been a BR fan. I was absolutely for signing him although I had concerns about his concussion and his age. It was a gamble well worth taking and I certainly don't blame Sather for this. It has not worked out. The Rangers must buy him out this summer: this probably will only get worse if he is not bought out.
There are bigger lessons to be learned here. Perhaps we should never sign athletes at age 30 to long term free agent contracts because the gamble is just to great. We have been burned repeatedly by this: Drury, Redden, etc (although in Redden's case Sather seems to have ignored skuttlebutt that Redden's skills were going). Signing your own FA's is a different story because you may have access to that baseline testing that perhaps measures reaction time, speed, etc. Do we have enough info. to resign Clowe, another athlete who seems to be aging? I don't know. I almost rather sign guys were are 34 or 35 who seems to have plateaued in their skills: they are not what they once were but are still productive. We have had some success with those types of guys: Straka, Prospel, Federtenko, for example.
I feel for aging, proud guys like BR (I know some have no sympathy for guys making such ungodly money). No matter what he does, he can't perform how he once did. He does not have a regular job like most of us have or had, where physical performance is not the prime asset for the job. It is not even a question of strength which can be maintained well into one 40s and even 50s. It is a question of making muscles firing quickly and that is something that begins to go for everyone on the wrong side of 30. Until the day comes when he can somehow offset the genetic aging process without PEDs, this will always be a part of sports.
I love BR but this is a trainwreck what will only get worse. He must he bought out.
