Kraken Jokes
Registered User
- May 28, 2010
- 3,991
- 1,512
There's a world of difference between the Subban-Weber trade and what this trade would be. It's not comparable at all.
Obviously Malkin is better but it makes no sense for Calgary.
So many brutal comments in here.
Geno just turned 30, guess it's time to get the rifle and put the old fella down
So many brutal comments in here.
Geno just turned 30, guess it's time to get the rifle and put the old fella down
Yeah, "Only my team's old guys can play anymore".
Someone should have told San Jose that.
They've been telling us that Thornton and the Sharks in general have been washed up for years. We should have traded Thornton several years ago while he still had some value and started a full-blown rebuild bc our players were too old and broken down. Same with Datsyuk and other old players.
That said, I think this is probably a case of lose-lose (tho the Pens would lose more). Unless the Flames plan to compete in the next few years, it's better for them to keep Monahan (and his lower cap hit) and their young F core. There's no way the Pens trade Malkin for Monahan.
They've been telling us that Thornton and the Sharks in general have been washed up for years. We should have traded Thornton several years ago while he still had some value and started a full-blown rebuild bc our players were too old and broken down. Same with Datsyuk and other old players.
That said, I think this is probably a case of lose-lose (tho the Pens would lose more). Unless the Flames plan to compete in the next few years, it's better for them to keep Monahan (and his lower cap hit) and their young F core. There's no way the Pens trade Malkin for Monahan.
Sure it does. The Flames are looking at contending for a playoff spot as soon as this season, and Malkin would certainly put them in contendition.
Teams don't plan ahead 10 years from now. If you have a chance to get a MUCH player who's only 30 when you're a playoff team then you take it.
By the time a player turns 32, they almost always slow down a bit. This is especially true for guys with injury problems, like knees.
Malkin is clearly the better player now, but will that be true in 2-3 years? My guess is that in 2 years both players will converge on the 70 point mark. Monahan is already in the low 60s, with room for improvement. Malkin is currently more of a ppg player, than the 100+ point guy he was. At 32-34 he'll probably be more of a 70 point guy.
So the point is that if you were looking to compete in the next 2 years, Malkin is the better choice. If you're in the midst of a long term rebuild, with a core in their early 20s, Monahan is the best choice. It's not that Malkin is over the hill, but he is trending down, as all players do in their 30s. That makes him less of a draw for a rebuilding team.
Except when it comes to players of Malkin's caliber there are a lot of examples where players remain dominant with age.
Just as many examples of players who fall apart by 34. Virtually all of them are done by 36, or at least a shadow of their former selves.
Just as many examples of players who fall apart by 34. Virtually all of them are done by 36, or at least a shadow of their former selves.
Players like Thornton and Datsyuk are the exception to the rule. Most players see a significant down turn by 32-33. By 35-36 most are barely NHL calibre.
You can't gamble on giving up young assets on any individual player being like Datsyuk or Thornton. Even then Datsyuk, who started off the years at 37 was nowhere near what he was. Thornton is similarly not the 100 point player he was either.
I think he had something to do with it.Malkin isn't a top five player anymore, and hes not the reason the pens won the cup. Malkin isn't even a top five forward. Crosby, Benn, Kane, Ovechkin, Kopitar, Bergeron, Tavares, Thornton, are all better.
Players like Thornton and Datsyuk are the exception to the rule. Most players see a significant down turn by 32-33. By 35-36 most are barely NHL calibre.
You can't gamble on giving up young assets on any individual player being like Datsyuk or Thornton. Even then Datsyuk, who started off the years at 37 was nowhere near what he was. Thornton is similarly not the 100 point player he was either.
Elite players are exceptions to the rule and Malkin is an elite player, though he has more health concerns than Thornton.
Here's a good article about elite forward goal and assist production as elite players age. Appleyard on HFBoards wrote it.
http://alongtheboards.com/2015/09/peak-decline-elite-nhl-forwards/
On average, a 30 YO elite player is approximately as productive as he was aged 24 and 25 while an elite 35 year old will be about as good as an elite 21 year old in terms of points. They've declined but they're still playing very well. Assists peak later and decline more slowly than goals, which helps Thornton (bc lol what are goals?). Looking at assists, a 35 YO elite player is better than a 21 YO elite player. Shooters with a high s% decline more than those with a more average s% who take a lot of shots (like Ovi). http://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2014/3/17/5507218/nhl-stats-aging-curves-forward-types
Those were more recent article but there was similar information available before that showed that elite players, especially playmakers, decline more slowly than average players. It didn't seem to matter to ppl who say (for years) that teams should trade their elite players who are going to fall off a cliff any day. Thornton isn't the 100 point player he was before but he's scored .92 points per game over the last three years and is a top player.
I said that I thought this was a lose-lose trade bc the Pens are in a win-now mode and the Flames aren't. I don't know why you think I'm suggesting that the Flames trade Monahan for Malkin (assuming he was even available).
Flames would need to add. Monahan is a good player, but this is Evgeni Malkin we are talking about.
Malkin has already fallen off his 24 and 25 year old production. Agree that he's still great.
However, like I said before, I see both Malkin and Monahan converging around 70 points in a couple of years. After that Monahan will continue at that pace. Malkin will continue to slow down.
Only for the next 2-3 years will Malkin be the superior player. As Calgary is not competing now, Monahan is the better choice.
You really have no reason to believe Malkin will drop off significantly in 2 years other than your opinion. History has shown that players of his calibre are still elite well into their late 30s
Going from 80 to 70 pts/year (pro-rated) would be quite good even for an elite player at 32-33. Many non-elite but great players are non-NHL calibre anymore. By the 34-35 range very few elite players are putting up more than 60 points per year. At 37+ it's the Jagr types who are still going. You get an occassional freak season out of a Thornton or Selanne type, but once again those are unusual.