So he's worth less than Jason Garrison and more than Filip Kuba based on his All Star season this past year? Hmm.The_Pauser wrote:No guarantees he takes the next step, but I don't see how it makes sense to invest $6M+ long-term in him hoping that he does. It is his potential to take the next step that has me willing to go up to $5.25M for him, otherwise I would be looking at the $4.2-4.5M range.
Edler played through injuries this past season, if I remember correctly.dbr wrote:Or maybe Bieksa for once isn't dealing with a huge gash on his leg? Funny how a player gets significantly better when he isn't dealing with a significant injury.
And are you seriously trying to argue that playing with Dan Hamhuis doesn't help Kevin Bieksa? I'm not sure even KB would argue that..
Nobody... nobody engaged in this discussion is clamoring to pay Alex Edler $6.6m a year.I never said Edler WASN'T going to close the gap or surpass Bieksa. I was saying that Edler has not been better than Bieksa, so right now he is not worth more than Bieksa. I recognize Edler's potential to improve and would be comfortable paying him more than Bieksa, but around $2M more is absurd.
I mean sure, a bunch of GMs would if he ever hit unrestricted free agency (in an environment similar to what we have this year), but you're not aguing against them. You're arguing against the straw man you've erected in this thread.
You're completely ignoring what happened prior to these two players making the NHL. By the time Edler was playing his first games in a high level league (the dub in 2005-06) Kevin Bieksa had played four years in the CCHA and a full season in the AHL.Edler hasn't had to deal with the same physical issues that Bieksa had to deal with. Edler also has almost as much NHL experience as Bieksa has. Usually plyaers develop with experience, and physically. Physical development tends to occur at the very beginning of a players career after they are drafted. The second component comes through experience and with that I fail to see how Edler's age will matter too much in comparison to Bieksa given their NHL experience.
That year was the first in which he played more than 40 games in a season and the third in which he played over 10, he might have the least amount of mileage (ie. experience) of any player with nearly 400 games of NHL experience.
And like I said previously, Bieksa has improved as a player in his late 20s, it's pretty common for defensemen to do this (it's bsaically a cliche that defensemen take longer to develop than forwards), I don't see why it's so unreasonable.
We are talking about Matt Carle money here.Again, to sum this up: I do think Edler has potential, which is why I would be comfortable making him our highest paid defenseman. However, I do not feel that Edler has been our best defenseman, and the stats support me on this. Edler has had moments where if he wore the number 3 on his jersey people would be trying to run him out of town. Is there a guarantee that he will develop and improve? No. Is it likely that he will? Tough to say, but I am willing to pay to find out. I am just uncomfortable with paying him like he's a legitimate number 1 defenseman when he hasn't proven that he is one.
Look at the guys making $5.5m-$6.5m, it's littered with guys that are not the mythical "legitimate number 1 defenseman" - Carle, Visnovsky, Burns, Seabrook, Green, Timonen, Phaneuf. I'd take a bunch of em on my team, some are as good as or better than Edler, many are not. Over the term of a hypothetical six year deal you'd see a ton of others hit that pay grade that wouldn't be near as good as Edler.
But.. we are talking about the low end of that. I'd be happy with $5.5m for Edler, content with $5.75m-6m and I would see $6-6.5m as the cost of doing business in this league (I wouldn't be happy about it unless we watched him put up a monster season this year). A GM desperate to add talent to his blueline (ie. most of them) might even offer him more in the kind of UFA environment we have today.
Anyway, it's obvious we disagree about how good Edler is now as well as what capacity he has to improve. Not surprising then that you see his value to the team now and in the future differently than I do.