Petey vs Pastrnak: They're both solid play drivers - pay the man.

[HKSR]

Had a debate with @wai_lai416 and much respect for him going through the exercise of checking game by game, point by point to see how each of these players produce with and without the top players on each of their teams.

 

I did the exercise for myself and threw it into a spreadsheet (of course), and here are the results:

 

For each player, we look at his production at EV, PP, SH, and EN/PS (empty net / penalty shot).

 

For Petey, we look at his production with and without Hughes, Miller, and Boeser.

For Pasta, we look at his production with and without Mcavoy, Marchand, and Coyle.

 

Here is Petey's table:

 

 

Here is Pasta's Table:

 

 

TLDR:  So what do these tables tell us?

 

For Petey:

EV:  40% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

PP:  96% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

Totals:  62% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

 

For Pasta:

EV:  39% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

PP:  76% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

Totals:  56% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

 

That means there is a 6% difference between Petey and Pasta when it comes to production without the top guys on each of their respective teams.  In other words, if these rates are consistent, over a 100 point season, Petey will generate 38 points without Miller, Hughes, or Boeser involved, and Pasta will generate 44 points without Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle involved.

 

This tells us that Pasta is a bit of a better play driver without the top guys, but Petey is really not that far off.  It really comes down to the PP numbers.  Pasta is better driving a PP without the help of the top guys, which really isn't all that surprising. 

 

At EV, Pasta and Petey are basically the same when it comes to play driving ability.

 

So from this perspective, I could see Petey making anywhere from $11M to $12M.  It would be a fair deal.

[PeteyBOI]

7 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Had a debate with @wai_lai416 and much respect for him going through the exercise of checking game by game, point by point to see how each of these players produce with and without the top players on each of their teams.

 

I did the exercise for myself and threw it into a spreadsheet (of course), and here are the results:

 

For each player, we look at his production at EV, PP, SH, and EN/PS (empty net / penalty shot).

 

For Petey, we look at his production with and without Hughes, Miller, and Boeser.

For Pasta, we look at his production with and without Mcavoy, Marchand, and Coyle.

 

Here is Petey's table:

 

 

Here is Pasta's Table:

 

 

TLDR:  So what do these tables tell us?

 

For Petey:

EV:  40% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

PP:  96% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

Totals:  62% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

 

For Pasta:

EV:  39% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

PP:  76% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

Totals:  56% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

 

That means there is a 6% difference between Petey and Pasta when it comes to production without the top guys on each of their respective teams.  In other words, if these rates are consistent, over a 100 point season, Petey will generate 38 points without Miller, Hughes, or Boeser involved, and Pasta will generate 44 points without Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle involved.

 

This tells us that Pasta is a bit of a better play driver without the top guys, but Petey is really not that far off.  It really comes down to the PP numbers.  Pasta is better driving a PP without the help of the top guys, which really isn't all that surprising. 

 

At EV, Pasta and Petey are basically the same when it comes to play driving ability.

 

So from this perspective, I could see Petey making anywhere from $11M to $12M.  It would be a fair deal.

that where I have him too...

[Phil_314]

Didn't need a spreadsheet to see both guys are good.  They were both all-stars after all.

[higgyfan]

I think Pete's age and role adds to his value.

 

$11m-$12m sounds about right.  Pete may want a shorter term, though.

[Kevin Biestra]

 

[LillStrimma]

3 hours ago, HKSR said:

Had a debate with @wai_lai416 and much respect for him going through the exercise of checking game by game, point by point to see how each of these players produce with and without the top players on each of their teams.

 

I did the exercise for myself and threw it into a spreadsheet (of course), and here are the results:

 

For each player, we look at his production at EV, PP, SH, and EN/PS (empty net / penalty shot).

 

For Petey, we look at his production with and without Hughes, Miller, and Boeser.

For Pasta, we look at his production with and without Mcavoy, Marchand, and Coyle.

 

Here is Petey's table:

 

 

Here is Pasta's Table:

 

 

TLDR:  So what do these tables tell us?

 

For Petey:

EV:  40% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

PP:  96% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

Totals:  62% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

 

For Pasta:

EV:  39% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

PP:  76% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

Totals:  56% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

 

That means there is a 6% difference between Petey and Pasta when it comes to production without the top guys on each of their respective teams.  In other words, if these rates are consistent, over a 100 point season, Petey will generate 38 points without Miller, Hughes, or Boeser involved, and Pasta will generate 44 points without Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle involved.

 

This tells us that Pasta is a bit of a better play driver without the top guys, but Petey is really not that far off.  It really comes down to the PP numbers.  Pasta is better driving a PP without the help of the top guys, which really isn't all that surprising. 

 

At EV, Pasta and Petey are basically the same when it comes to play driving ability.

 

So from this perspective, I could see Petey making anywhere from $11M to $12M.  It would be a fair deal.

You made an fault on your analysis.

On PP it actually doesn’t matter as much who you play with as it is wjhen playing EV…

So the real difference is 1%.

 

Pasternak got oppurtunity to play with others on PP.

Say that Petey play with Hogz and some other. They will most definately unlock the defence on PP.

 

 

[Zombieksa]

11.25 x 8, 90M

[Rocket-68]

34 minutes ago, Zombieksa said:

11.25 x 8, 90M

 

Not that it would happen, but I recall Alexandre Burrows leaving money on the table to help the team field a more competitive squad - his agent was angry when Burrows stated as much publicly. Now, I am not comparing Burrows to Petey in anyway but if Petey took the view "an extra 2 mil a year will not make my life any better (or worse) so will leave a bit for others", I would personally start a petition to erect a statue outside Rogers Arena.

 

From a personal point of view, I was negotiating compensation with a business associate using warrants in my company as the vehicle. I thought more would be better but he said to me, "you know, an extra $500,000 or $1,000,000 to me won't change my life one iota. I am happy with my ask and save the bump for <so and so>. They will appreciate the benefit."

 

I learned a valuable lesson that day. 

 

I hope that Petey would do the same, but most likely he won't - and no animosity towards him either way. Hockey is a short business and one may prioritize making the maximum bag while one is able to. Nothing wrong with that.

 

 

Edited February 13 by Rocket-68

[RawkDrummer]

pay Petey!

[VegasCanuck]

4 hours ago, HKSR said:

Had a debate with @wai_lai416 and much respect for him going through the exercise of checking game by game, point by point to see how each of these players produce with and without the top players on each of their teams.

 

I did the exercise for myself and threw it into a spreadsheet (of course), and here are the results:

 

For each player, we look at his production at EV, PP, SH, and EN/PS (empty net / penalty shot).

 

For Petey, we look at his production with and without Hughes, Miller, and Boeser.

For Pasta, we look at his production with and without Mcavoy, Marchand, and Coyle.

 

Here is Petey's table:

 

 

Here is Pasta's Table:

 

 

TLDR:  So what do these tables tell us?

 

For Petey:

EV:  40% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

PP:  96% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

Totals:  62% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

 

For Pasta:

EV:  39% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

PP:  76% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

Totals:  56% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

 

That means there is a 6% difference between Petey and Pasta when it comes to production without the top guys on each of their respective teams.  In other words, if these rates are consistent, over a 100 point season, Petey will generate 38 points without Miller, Hughes, or Boeser involved, and Pasta will generate 44 points without Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle involved.

 

This tells us that Pasta is a bit of a better play driver without the top guys, but Petey is really not that far off.  It really comes down to the PP numbers.  Pasta is better driving a PP without the help of the top guys, which really isn't all that surprising. 

 

At EV, Pasta and Petey are basically the same when it comes to play driving ability.

 

So from this perspective, I could see Petey making anywhere from $11M to $12M.  It would be a fair deal.

I think everyone would be pretty happy if we could wrap Pettersson up for 11.25 million for 8 years.

 

I don't think it's really a question of Pettersson staying here and signing here long term, He's stated numerous times that he wants to finish the season and doesn't want the distraction of contract negotiations mid season, effecting himself or the team.

 

He's an RFA after this year, we have a degree of control.

[Elias Pettersson]

So you made an entire spreadsheet to arrive at a conclusion we already knew?  That Petey was going to sign a deal up to the $12 million range. 
 

I guess you needed to satisfy yourself because in your mind you kept saying that Pasta is a much better player than Petey. But after all of your “work” you now realized that he isn’t. 
 

Also, you forgot to mention that Petey plays in all situations including the penalty kill, he’s also a centre who takes faceoffs and is a better defensive player. 
 

So, at the end of the day, Petey is the more valuable player. Not to mention that Petey is also 3 years younger than Pasta. 

[HKSR]

53 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

So you made an entire spreadsheet to arrive at a conclusion we already knew?  That Petey was going to sign a deal up to the $12 million range. 
 

I guess you needed to satisfy yourself because in your mind you kept saying that Pasta is a much better player than Petey. But after all of your “work” you now realized that he isn’t. 
 

Also, you forgot to mention that Petey plays in all situations including the penalty kill, he’s also a centre who takes faceoffs and is a better defensive player. 
 

So, at the end of the day, Petey is the more valuable player. Not to mention that Petey is also 3 years younger than Pasta. 

Yup.  I work off facts and stats.  It's the intelligent way to approach things.  

 

Pastrnak has one major thing over Petey though.  Goal scoring ability.  A player could have 50 goals and 20 assists and make a lot more than the guy that has 20 goals and 50 assists.  It's just the natural premium for goal scorers.

[Elias Pettersson]

1 hour ago, HKSR said:

Yup.  I work off facts and stats.  It's the intelligent way to approach things.  

 

Pastrnak has one major thing over Petey though.  Goal scoring ability.  A player could have 50 goals and 20 assists and make a lot more than the guy that has 20 goals and 50 assists.  It's just the natural premium for goal scorers.

Sure, I get that. However, the difference between them in goals is only 5 this year, not 30 as per your example. So Pastrnak really doesn’t have much of an advantage in goals either. 
 

At the end of the day, the majority of $10 million+ players in the NHL are centres. That’s not a coincidence. 

[HKSR]

18 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Sure, I get that. However, the difference between them in goals is only 5 this year, not 30 as per your example. So Pastrnak really doesn’t have much of an advantage in goals either. 
 

At the end of the day, the majority of $10 million+ players in the NHL are centres. That’s not a coincidence. 

I'm going off how Pastrnak basically has 8 30goal seasons in a row including a 61 goal season.  That's some pretty hefty goal scoring ability.

 

Pasta is a pretty unique winger.  If I'm walking into game 7 of the Stanley Cup final, Pasta is near the top of my list for players I'd want on my team.  Top 5 anyways.  Not sure if Petey is there for ME yet.

[-AJ-]

Possibly a more significant difference between the two is two years apart in age. The two years younger that Petey is may allow him to command a little more. A long contract at his age is more likely to be good the whole way through than Pastrnak's.

[wai_lai416]

i mean i wish EP would sign for 11mil 11.5mil but even at 12mil i still think it's doable.. yes it would sacrifice a little depth but at the end of the day i think it's better to overpay a little on players that you know would perform than pay players that you hope might perform. mikheyev is great defensively and what not.. but let's be real he might be worth 4mil and we paying him 4.75mil.. garland love the way he plays but he's prolly closer to 4.25-4.5? like that alone is the difference between EP at 11mil and ep at 12mil we just need to be smart at not overpaying the middle tier players and we'll be fine. with the current management i think we'll be fine.. just have to make sure we ain't overpaying joshua blugar etc in the offseason like they deserve a raise but not in the 3mil range 

[Jeremy Hronek]

8 hours ago, HKSR said:

Had a debate with @wai_lai416 and much respect for him going through the exercise of checking game by game, point by point to see how each of these players produce with and without the top players on each of their teams.

 

I did the exercise for myself and threw it into a spreadsheet (of course), and here are the results:

 

For each player, we look at his production at EV, PP, SH, and EN/PS (empty net / penalty shot).

 

For Petey, we look at his production with and without Hughes, Miller, and Boeser.

For Pasta, we look at his production with and without Mcavoy, Marchand, and Coyle.

 

Here is Petey's table:

 

 

Here is Pasta's Table:

 

 

TLDR:  So what do these tables tell us?

 

For Petey:

EV:  40% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

PP:  96% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

Totals:  62% of his pts come with Miller, Hughes, or Boeser.

 

For Pasta:

EV:  39% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

PP:  76% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

Totals:  56% of his pts come with Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle.

 

That means there is a 6% difference between Petey and Pasta when it comes to production without the top guys on each of their respective teams.  In other words, if these rates are consistent, over a 100 point season, Petey will generate 38 points without Miller, Hughes, or Boeser involved, and Pasta will generate 44 points without Mcavoy, Marchand, or Coyle involved.

 

This tells us that Pasta is a bit of a better play driver without the top guys, but Petey is really not that far off.  It really comes down to the PP numbers.  Pasta is better driving a PP without the help of the top guys, which really isn't all that surprising. 

 

At EV, Pasta and Petey are basically the same when it comes to play driving ability.

 

So from this perspective, I could see Petey making anywhere from $11M to $12M.  It would be a fair deal.

This is an excellent and insightful analysis.  Thank you for sharing. 

[Jeremy Hronek]

4 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

i mean i wish EP would sign for 11mil 11.5mil but even at 12mil i still think it's doable.. yes it would sacrifice a little depth but at the end of the day i think it's better to overpay a little on players that you know would perform than pay players that you hope might perform. mikheyev is great defensively and what not.. but let's be real he might be worth 4mil and we paying him 4.75mil.. garland love the way he plays but he's prolly closer to 4.25-4.5? like that alone is the difference between EP at 11mil and ep at 12mil we just need to be smart at not overpaying the middle tier players and we'll be fine. with the current management i think we'll be fine.. just have to make sure we ain't overpaying joshua blugar etc in the offseason like they deserve a raise but not in the 3mil range 

To me, it sounds like you’re advocating something similar to the Toronto Maple Leafs model (ie being top heavy in terms of paying your top players premium money).  Unless I’m not understanding your perspective?

 

If you look at the past 15 years or so, the top players on each team had cap hits that were below market value which ultimately helped the team invest in more depth (Chicago, LA, and Boston from 2010-2015).  Pittsburgh and Washington also won cups from 2016, 2017, 2018 when the cap went higher which resulted in lower C.H.% to their top players that were on “grandfathered” contracts).  St. Louis, Tampa, and Colorado were similar (as was Florida and Vegas).

 

Meanwhile, teams that have paid more than 11 million to any one player have not won a cup.  That number used to be 10 but that has changed as the cap has risen (ie resulting in lower CH% to top players).  
 

Ultimately, what I’m saying, is that Petey needs to take one for the team if he’s serious about wanting to build a winner here. If he’s not, then maybe he needs to be moved.

[wai_lai416]

3 minutes ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

To me, it sounds like you’re advocating something similar to the Toronto Maple Leafs model (ie being top heavy in terms of paying your top players premium money).  Unless I’m not understanding your perspective?

 

If you look at the past 15 years or so, the top players on each team had cap hits that were below market value which ultimately helped the team invest in more depth (Chicago, LA, and Boston from 2010-2015).  Pittsburgh and Washington also won cups from 2016, 2017, 2018 when the cap went higher which resulted in lower C.H.% to their top players that were on “grandfathered” contracts).  St. Louis, Tampa, and Colorado were similar (as was Florida and Vegas).

 

Meanwhile, teams that have paid more than 11 million to any one player have not won a cup.  That number used to be 10 but that has changed as the cap has risen (ie resulting in lower CH% to top players).  
 

Ultimately, what I’m saying, is that Petey needs to take one for the team if he’s serious about wanting to build a winner here. If he’s not, then maybe he needs to be moved.

not really.. the toronto model is 4 11mil+ player. we have at most 2 right now in ep and hughes in a few years.. the rest are in the 8mil range let say we have 2 11-12mil player and the rest are 8mil and below.. that's like 6mil difference between 4 players

[wai_lai416]

27 minutes ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

To me, it sounds like you’re advocating something similar to the Toronto Maple Leafs model (ie being top heavy in terms of paying your top players premium money).  Unless I’m not understanding your perspective?

 

If you look at the past 15 years or so, the top players on each team had cap hits that were below market value which ultimately helped the team invest in more depth (Chicago, LA, and Boston from 2010-2015).  Pittsburgh and Washington also won cups from 2016, 2017, 2018 when the cap went higher which resulted in lower C.H.% to their top players that were on “grandfathered” contracts).  St. Louis, Tampa, and Colorado were similar (as was Florida and Vegas).

 

Meanwhile, teams that have paid more than 11 million to any one player have not won a cup.  That number used to be 10 but that has changed as the cap has risen (ie resulting in lower CH% to top players).  
 

Ultimately, what I’m saying, is that Petey needs to take one for the team if he’s serious about wanting to build a winner here. If he’s not, then maybe he needs to be moved.

and the toronto model would have coulda worked.. if they spent the 4x 11mil+ on maybe 1 or 2 defensive player.. what's the biggest issue with toronto? defence. if they have one of those 11mil guy a 11mil norris caliber defenceman instead. every one of their defenceman plays down 1 step and maybe they are a much different team.. say reilly with a norris caliber defenceman as his partner instead of whatever he has now.. that might be a legit top pairing right there. 

[Jeremy Hronek]

1 hour ago, wai_lai416 said:

and the toronto model would have coulda worked.. if they spent the 4x 11mil+ on maybe 1 or 2 defensive player.. what's the biggest issue with toronto? defence. if they have one of those 11mil guy a 11mil norris caliber defenceman instead. every one of their defenceman plays down 1 step and maybe they are a much different team.. say reilly with a norris caliber defenceman as his partner instead of whatever he has now.. that might be a legit top pairing right there. 

 

You might be right but if you look at the past 15 years, any team with a relatively high cap hit to any one player doesn't win the Stanley Cup.  

 

For the longest time, any team that had a 10 million dollar player on their team didn't win a cup. Now, with the cap going up, that number (kiss of death cap hit) might be around $11 million.

 

Cost controlled elite talent + depth seems to have been the winning formula for the past 15 years or so.  

 

-Crosby and Ovechkin's teams never won cups from 2010-2015

-Chicago and LA saw steep declines once Kane, Toews, and Kopitar received 10+ million dollar contracts

-McDavid and Matthews have yet to win cups (many argue that Toronto screwed themselves long term with the Tavares signing).

-San Jose basically went into the shitter when they acquired Erik Karlsson and his contract.  

 

Despite winning only one cup, Boston has arguably been the most consistent team over the past 14-15 years due to their culture of players 'buying in' and accepting less money to serve the greater good (although Pasta has recently bucked that trend).  

Edited February 13 by Jeremy Hronek

[wai_lai416]

41 minutes ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

 

You might be right but if you look at the past 15 years, any team with a relatively high cap hit to any one player doesn't win the Stanley Cup.  

 

For the longest time, any team that had a 10 million dollar player on their team didn't win a cup. Now, with the cap going up, that number (kiss of death cap hit) might be around $11 million.

 

Cost controlled elite talent + depth seems to have been the winning formula for the past 15 years or so.  

 

-Crosby and Ovechkin's teams never won cups from 2010-2015

-Chicago and LA saw steep declines once Kane, Toews, and Kopitar received 10+ million dollar contracts

-McDavid and Matthews have yet to win cups (many argue that Toronto screwed themselves long term with the Tavares signing).

-San Jose basically went into the shitter when they acquired Erik Karlsson and his contract.  

 

Despite winning only one cup, Boston has arguably been the most consistent team over the past 14-15 years due to their culture of players 'buying in' and accepting less money to serve the greater good (although Pasta has recently bucked that trend).  

that is not true you need to look at salary cap vs salary %. crosby ovechkin and a boat load of other players won the cup when they are equivalent to a 11-13mil player today when crosby won his cup the cap was like 60-70mil.. again the salary cap increases = players salary increases if and when the salary cap hits let say 100mil i guess no team will ever win a cup with a future star player coz the baseline for star players salary will be around 10mil+ i guess bedard will never win a cup coz if he keep his production up his next contract might already be in the 10mil+ tampa bay is a horrible example because they were using loophole on the salary cap.. but plenty of team that won a cup have someone in the equivalent of 11mil+ at the time.. 

 

if we are using the logic you don't win with players over 10mil that means all the elite players in this league will never win a cup as soon as their ELC is over. colorado will never win again edmonton have 0 chance same with rangers LA buffalo and any team that have an up and coming superstar those guys will never win.. if we have a chance to draft a franchise player mcdavid type 1st overall we should pass on it coz unless u are winning the cup in the first 3 years of the elc which is unlikely his next contract will be in the 11+ so we can't win either.

 

st louis is prolly the best example.. but i think they are more of a fluke and rode the coaching bump and ahl goalie to the extreme

 

colorado prolly come 2nd closest in terms of not having a 10mil+ equivalent player on the salary cap.. then again they have mackinnon still on his cheap contract at 6.5mil when he's really a 12-13mil player kudos to colorado management and they were smart offering big money to makar to lure him to sign prior to him exploding to his norris.. but really colorado won because all their player well exceeded their cap hit.. nichuskin 2.5mil kadri 4.5mil nichuskin playing like a 6-7mil player kadri playing like a 8-9mil player and mackinnon playing like a 12-13mil player

 

vegas have eichel 10mil stone 9.5 pietrangelo 8.8 that's 28.3mil 

we have hughes 7.85 Miller 8.. so EP would have to sign for 12.45 for it to even add up to 28.3mil

 

the big difference? vegas have marchassault thompson hill theodore all well exceeding their pay with their production

 

the team with the most players performing close to and or exceeding their salary is usually the team that ends up winning.. the canucks right now? we are close.. but myers mikheyev and to a lesser extent garland is not giving the production of their cap hit.. look at our 2011 roster.. can you say any of our players were overpaid? 

 

 

[sxqhfeh]

trade Petey for Pastrnak 

[wai_lai416]

1 hour ago, sxqhfeh said:

trade Petey for Pastrnak 

lol pastrnak will definitely waive his ntc just to pay 1mil extra in tax every year

[Sativika]

Yea. We're fortunate to be in the situation we're in now; top grade players in Demmer,  JTM locked in at a good cap, Huggy on his team friendly bridge, Flow playing up to his contract, and trades and acquisitions playing up to their contracts, short term as they are.  

 

Sure. there's some glitches with Myers, Garly and Ilya regarding what they're payed in relation to their respective positions, Soucy's injury issues. Some good things too in Daks and Juulsen's uprising, Hogs performance since coming back from AHL duties. We all know the good and the bad. I needn't bring it up.

 

A situation the Leafs are unfortunate to have. Sh*t defense at the expense of going large with their young, as yet proven star forwards. As mentioned earlier, paying Tavares the 11mil probably did 'em in for any top Dman acquisition. Ah. Their problem. Too bad, too sad!

 

Pasta is obviously a great player. He impresses me at every turn, albeit only seeing him a few time a year. I don't know if he's a comparable to Petey. Probably more so to Barzal, Nylander or maybe Kyle Conner. And these guys are just wingers. Albeit pretty damn good ones!

 

Petey has the advantage of being younger by a year or two and plays centre as well as wing. On paper because of these seemingly advantageous aspects, he he would command a salary equal or more than these guys make. But I don't really know about this kid.

 

Because we see him every game, he's under the microscope. That added to his contract coming up and an eventual huge payday forthcoming, we deem his on ice shortcomings (Of which there are few!), his aloof nature, his regard as seemingly putting himself first over the team (As judged by some of his comments during interviews and such!),  as knocks against him. Sadly, it seems as such. 

 

With that I say, pay the man. He may come off as cynical and aloof, but hey. Not everyone can be lovable in character like Kuzy was. I mean Kuzy plays for one of our much hated rivals and we still love him. Go figure!

 

Petey's due for a big payday. However long the term and however big the salary determines where we stand with him. Shorter term, manageable cap, or long term team friendly? Who knows. All I know is he's worth having on our team for any chance at Lord Stanley!

 

Go Canucks Go!!!!!