KoHo said:
I like how you conveniently describe is prime years (age 25-28) as "outlier" years. ive me a break. By saying there's no evidence for Vinny's decline you're simply ignoring the facts.
Well, like it all you want but it's not true. See, the key to your kind of blatant distortion there is by purposefully misstating what I've said you're kind of revealing how wobbly it is to have no legs to stand on. Now, we have our disagreements but I'm pretty sure that you know the difference between the number 2 and the number 3. I've said that
two of Lecavalier's years are outliers and you say I'm saying that about three years and the key to how inaccurate your argument is really rests in that third year.
Now, when you say Lecavalier's "25-28" years you're talking about 2005-06 through 2007-2008 now, in the latter two of those years Lecavalier was absolutely better than he's been recently. But, again, those two years are almost complete aberrations in his career. Now, that first year, 05-06 he scored 75 points in 80 games. This year, again, he produced at a clip that works out to 67 points over a 80 game pace. But, sure, 8 points isn't nothing, right? Pretty steep decline there, right?
:
Well, except when you actually look at it. 2005-2006 Lecavalier got 20:07 a night in ice-time. 2012-2013 Lecavalier got 17:52. 25 year old Vinny got 5:10 minutes a night on the PP. 33 year old Vinny got about 60% of that at 3:03. 25 year old Vinny's #1 PP unit was Him with Martin St. Louis, Brad Richards and Dan Boyle on the point and then either Fred Modin or Vinny Prospal. This year's Lecavalier wasn't really on the #1 PP unit but even if he were the supporting staff is significantly less strong. The highest scoring defensemen Tampa had this year were Matt Carle and Victor Hedman. In 2005-2006 the NHL had a spike in scoring in general, with the league-wide goals per game being at 6.05, in large part due to the tons of penalties being called as teams got adjusted to the new rules. This year goals per game are down to 5.30. I mean, that right there almost accounts for the difference itself.
So, really, in light in the reduction of ice-time, the drastic reduction in PP ice time and the weaker supporting cast the 8 points you're hanging your hat on as the "decline" from his peak years is pretty flimsy. And before you start Lecavalier got significantly more ice-time in the two years outlying years. So, really, there's nothing even resembling good evidence that 33 year old Lecavalier wasn't fully capable of producing points at the exact same rate as 25 year old Lecavalier.
So it's not that i'm ignoring the facts, it's really just that I'm able to deal with a slightly more complicated set of facts than 75 is bigger than 67 and 33 being more than 25.
KoHo said:
Still undoubtedly a good player, but on the wrong side of his career arc. Haven't we already learned it's not a good idea to sign declining players until they're 37 or 28?
Now that we've established that you're largely wrong the facts I think we can turn a little bit to the more general point here. The answer to this question is no. It's not something we've learned as a hard and fast rule. Even if we take it as a given that Lecavalier is on a downward trend he's still productive enough that he can trend downward for 4 years and still be a productive player in all of those seasons. I've made the Sundin comparison a few times because it's an easy one, they're both big guys who were taken with the #1 pick, but if you'd signed Sundin at 33 to a long term deal until he was 37 you'd have gotten 4 years of excellent production and leadership with no real decline(he scored 75 points the year he turned 33, 78 points the year he turned 37). Despite the fact that, like Lecavalier, Sundin at 33 was well removed from the years where he'd scored his most points.
Well, ok, maybe Sundin is too grandiose a comparison. How about Gary Roberts? I mean, sure, he was a good player for the Leafs but he didn't get a multiple year deal at 33 and provide a bunch of years of excellent service. He got his multi-year deal at 34 and provided a bunch of years of excellent service. I think Leafs fans were pretty happy there.
I mean, at some point you just have to deal with reality. Lecavalier is still producing like a #1 center. There's no reason to think he can't continue to do so for enough years to make his addition a worthwhile one. A four or five year deal is not some sort of shackle that will neccessarily negate the positives even if he only has one or two good years in him.
