nucci Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 Many opinions here that salary cap and economy will adversely effect Drew's market value. I disagree. There is always and owner and a team that bucks the trend. If Stafford hits mid-twenties in goals and has a eye-catching playoff performance, someone will be tempted to take a run at him. Assuming he lasts that long... His trade-value has never been higher than it is right now. Please tell me you are not saying to trade Stafford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 Bernier put up 45-45-90 in his first 3 years before getting the contract. Stafford is already at 43-55-98 with games left to play in his 3rd season. I'd say it's a safe assumption that his goals will climb above Bernier's before the end of the year. So statistically, he is a better player than Bernier was at that point. It seems fair to use them as comparibles. I guess we'll have to wait and see if all this economy talk really will deflate deals a bit. But then again, Bernier only got his deal (1 yr, 2.5 million) thanks to St. Louis returning the favor on the Vancouver Backes offer sheet, so who knows if the same could happen with Stafford. First thought, It was going to be a statistical comparison of Vanek and Stafford but Shrader's evaluation is better and more relavant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 It was going to be a statistical comparison of Vanek and Stafford but Shrader's evaluation is better and more relavant. Yeah, I read yours after I posted and realized how quickly I had ruined your question. Oh well, at least you have that hot blind wife to go home to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 It was going to be a statistical comparison of Vanek and Stafford but Shrader's evaluation is better and more relavant. 1) a one year, $2.5 million contract is a far cry from $30 or $40 million. 2) Vanek didn't get his deal till he scored 43 goals in his 2nd year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 1) a one year, $2.5 million contract is a far cry from $30 or $40 million. 2) Vanek didn't get his deal till he scored 43 goals in his 2nd year Hence my previous post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 Hence my previous post. I thought you were just trying to earn some points for your suite invitation. :rolleyes: I am not sure we are that far apart, anyway. While I stand by my no way stance, its not like it would be the most surprising thing that ever happened in the world of sports contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 Please tell me you are not saying to trade Stafford. Heck no.. I am cognizant of the fact that I control nothing and what I say has no bearing on what will happen. My only point is when teams start talking trade, they won't be looking past him.. From a purely objective, non-emotional point of view, what else on our team could we part with that other teams WOULD WANT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.