Paying anyone not to perform is bad. But in Danault we're talking about a guy who has such little offensive production to offer that the only way he could give you less is to not play at all.
No I don't think he's already as good but I'm sure that he has the potential to be as good or better with time because the skills he needs to master are the kind of skills that don't require elite talent, just an elite work ethic. If you were trying to get Evans to do what Suzuki does then you'd have a major problem on your hands.
Danault is 28 years old. There's no more "potential" left in him. What you see is as much as you're ever going to get. He's at his peak right now.
plus dollar billz
not sure we should trust hawks references....just sayin
exactky
You really don't understand hockey do you? There are actually three zones, not one.
Bob Gainey did not always produce (goals) in the playoffs.. neither did Carbo... there is a reason why 3rd line and 4th line heroes surface during the playoffs, because teams game plan is to shut down the other's team top lines.
Gainey and Carbo are HOF`s and did a tad better than 1 goal in 22 games
That's what the playoff bonus money is for. You don't pay a guy a king's ransom to maybe be dominant in the playoffs IF your team can somehow score enough goals to win enough games to qualify. You pay your stars, not the members of the chorus.
The only zone that matters when it comes to dishing out big money is the offensive zone. Your big earners are your scorers, your top pair defensemen and your goalie. Everybody else is a role player who gets paid role player money.
Really in 93 - Carbo got 6 pts in 20 games.. 3 g 3 a .. Gainey had several playoffs where he did not score or only had one... you make too much of goal scoring for a guy who's job is to shut down a line.. you also have to look at his line mates..
yep dano had our top winger....
Who was still injured and lost his shot.. add Evans and Leko
oddly enough i do not remember you coming up with those excuses for pleks
