Tanner Pearson Is the Most Criminally Underrated Canuck

[PistolPete13]

Pearson is a solid guy. I’m afraid he’s going to break his hand fighting guys.

 

When he’s out, we’ll see how much the team misses him. I think it would be quite a bit. 

[IBatch]

On 1/9/2022 at 3:26 PM, kilgore said:

Pearson has played well this season. I'd say he's worth the 3.25. 

 

The issue I had, and to a degree still have as long as its affecting the cap, is that Benning could have re-signed him for less. Could have had a bargain player instead of one playing just barley up to his contract.  JB was, as Sat put it at the time, bidding against himself with the re-sign. Most hockey writers were suggesting between 2.5 - 3.   That was the comparable based on other players with the same stats and age. And with the cap situation being so dire, and flat, and just after losing a few valuable pieces on the team because we couldn't squeeze them in, it seemed a bit dumb to pay Pearson, another aging vet when we are working to get younger, above market value.  He probably would have accepted 2.75.  And when every dollar counts, that extra 500,000 could come in handy. On its own, its not a terrible deal, but it was just another example of the cuts of a thousand knives with JB in charge.  Projection chart from evolving-hockey.com at the time:

 

 

 

 

Barley.   Thanks Pearson for sure is some barley, despite that stupid idiotic graph you found. 

 

Edit:  I'd ask you to extrapolate on " most writers" , why a guy like Tanner Pearson who's been in the top sixty LW scorers, out producing guys like Zack Parise over his tenure for us, deserves relative peanuts as a UFA still in his prime but i already know, you'd be hard pressed to find any actual non-blogger "Canucks pretend writer Army" types.   Guys absolutely earned 3.25 x 3 lol.   Just rubbish.  

 

And i was a CDCer who said for about a year, we should be trading this guy, he was low hanging fruit.    Why?  Because he'd give us futures and cap space we desperately needed.   He's obviously liked in the dressing room or he wouldn't be here.   Like or dislike Green, he also rejuvenated his career.    We can trade him next year if we need too.   Until then, why not just enjoy him while we do.   Pearson is 100% A OK at his cap hit.   We have very little on the left side as it is.   And he's not "old".   He's the same age the Sedins peaked. 

Edited January 12, 2022 by IBatch

[aGENT]

On 1/9/2022 at 12:26 PM, kilgore said:

Pearson has played well this season. I'd say he's worth the 3.25. 

 

The issue I had, and to a degree still have as long as its affecting the cap, is that Benning could have re-signed him for less. Could have had a bargain player instead of one playing just barley up to his contract.  JB was, as Sat put it at the time, bidding against himself with the re-sign. Most hockey writers were suggesting between 2.5 - 3.   That was the comparable based on other players with the same stats and age. And with the cap situation being so dire, and flat, and just after losing a few valuable pieces on the team because we couldn't squeeze them in, it seemed a bit dumb to pay Pearson, another aging vet when we are working to get younger, above market value.  He probably would have accepted 2.75.  And when every dollar counts, that extra 500,000 could come in handy. On its own, its not a terrible deal, but it was just another example of the cuts of a thousand knives with JB in charge.  Projection chart from evolving-hockey.com at the time:

 

 

 

The $2.5-$3 range was a "home town/re-sign early, ahead of the ED" discount that many (myself included) were hoping for. 

 

His comparables, even/especially those post-Covid, are making closer to +/-$3.5. Pre-Covid, he was probably looking at closer to +/-$3.75 territory.

 

His contract is basically at/even a hair under his market value. 

 

He, nor his contract are "exciting". But there's absolutely nothing wrong with either.

 

The biggest issue is that Benning signed him before he "had" to and didn't get a few hundred K bigger discount everyone was hoping for, for doing so.

 

Meh, such a nothing burger.

Edited January 12, 2022 by aGENT

[MikeyD]

On 1/10/2022 at 9:29 AM, HorvatToBaertschi said:

75% of the league are 20 goal scorers? A year and a half into his trade, he was 1st in goal scoring amongst canucks players in that timeframe.... can 75% of the league do that?

Pearson and his contract are both fine and have been his entire Canucks tenure. However, with upcoming contract negotiations with high end players, he'll be an important piece to move

75% of the league, when given that ice time and powerplay time, playing on a good 2nd line, will likely put up the numbers he has, yes. Especially considering how many empty net goals he accumulates (nearly 30% of his goals the one season he was a 20 goal scorer). Points wise, he's averaging 42 points a season which is slightly above average. You take away his empty net production and that dips as well. He's played on a talented 2nd line his entire tenure here, where Bo Horvat is well above 2nd line averages and usually has an above average winger to play with as well who gains offensive zone time just based on his faceoff acumen. He's well-put into a position to succeed. He's not playing on a line that he has to carry. 

He's an extremely streaky player and up until lately, hasn't been a guy who drives a line. 

 

You give a guy that ice time and powerplay time with those linemates, putting up 15 goals in a full season is extremely achievable. His shot is fairly average, his passing is average to below average, he's not a great forechecker, he's decent defensively but isn't a top defensive guy by any means, his effort is extremely inconsistent and with all of that I think he's more suited for a 3rd line role as opposed to a 2nd. 

 

Now ever since Boudreau took over, he's been a fantastic player. He's been the top player on the 2nd line ever since Boudreau took over and arguably a top 3 forward on this team (I personally have him at #2 behind Miller honestly). His first season here was dominant, his 2nd season was meh, and his third season was absolutely abysmal. I just think given the opportunity he's given, I don't think he's done anything more than an average nhl'er would, but also lacks many of the intangibles a player on a 2nd line should have. 

Edited January 12, 2022 by MikeyD

[Goal:thecup]

On 1/9/2022 at 12:26 PM, kilgore said:

Pearson has played well this season. I'd say he's worth the 3.25. 

 

The issue I had, and to a degree still have as long as its affecting the cap, is that Benning could have re-signed him for less. Could have had a bargain player instead of one playing just barley up to his contract.  JB was, as Sat put it at the time, bidding against himself with the re-sign. Most hockey writers were suggesting between 2.5 - 3.   That was the comparable based on other players with the same stats and age. And with the cap situation being so dire, and flat, and just after losing a few valuable pieces on the team because we couldn't squeeze them in, it seemed a bit dumb to pay Pearson, another aging vet when we are working to get younger, above market value.  He probably would have accepted 2.75.  And when every dollar counts, that extra 500,000 could come in handy. On its own, its not a terrible deal, but it was just another example of the cuts of a thousand knives with JB in charge.  Projection chart from evolving-hockey.com at the time:

 

 

 

Whoever made this pos chart is completely out to lunch.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Goal:thecup
added the word 'chart' to be clear; did not mean 'kilgore' was a pos.

[EternalCanuckFan]

Pearson's play has been better this season and his play has probably improved since Boudreau took over.

 

I don't think the problem with Pearson has ever been that he's a "bad" player.  He's a very useful player and he has the capacity to produce at a helpful pace for most teams.  In the season Pearson joined the Canucks and the following COVID shortened season, Pearson was legitimately a solid top-6/9 forward.

 

The concern last year was that Pearson had regressed (in production) back to the 18/19 season when he was traded from LAK to PIT and then to VAN.  Given Pearson's age and regression, I think there was genuine concern in his ability to bounce back this year.  Pearson's not "old" by any means, but he's also at an age where many players start to decline.

 

I think this, and both the timing of his re-signing and his cap hit (as pointed out by others), were why there were concerns about his new contract.  It also just seemed like a strange prioritization since both Pettersson and Hughes needed new contracts too.  I can understand the need to have stability in the locker room, especially after the changes in the 2020/2021 offseason, but it still seemed strange.

 

Pearson's cap hit seems more reasonable now that he's producing at a 30-40 point pace but what if he regresses to a 15-20 point forward in the final 2-years of his contract?  We'll enjoy it for now and I do hope Pearson can keep things going, but I can still understand the apprehension about Pearson and wouldn't necessarily consider him criminally underrated.  Perhaps less underrated and more unappreciated for the things he does well when he's not producing.

[alt kilgore]

4 hours ago, IBatch said:

 

Barley.   Thanks Pearson for sure is some barley, despite that stupid idiotic graph you found. 

 

Edit:  I'd ask you to extrapolate on " most writers" , why a guy like Tanner Pearson who's been in the top sixty LW scorers, out producing guys like Zack Parise over his tenure for us, deserves relative peanuts as a UFA still in his prime but i already know, you'd be hard pressed to find any actual non-blogger "Canucks pretend writer Army" types.   Guys absolutely earned 3.25 x 3 lol.   Just rubbish.  

 

And i was a CDCer who said for about a year, we should be trading this guy, he was low hanging fruit.    Why?  Because he'd give us futures and cap space we desperately needed.   He's obviously liked in the dressing room or he wouldn't be here.   Like or dislike Green, he also rejuvenated his career.    We can trade him next year if we need too.   Until then, why not just enjoy him while we do.   Pearson is 100% A OK at his cap hit.   We have very little on the left side as it is.   And he's not "old".   He's the same age the Sedins peaked. 

 

Not sure what you are so mad about bro.  Spelling?

I think Pearson is worth the 3.25.  Did you want to pay him more? IMO he was paid what he was worth. Not less. I've heard Scotch whisky is made from barley and the morning dew on angel's nipples. Its a good thing.

 

I can go and find past articles by writers that questioned the amount and timing at the time. Graphs like that were honest projections.  Here's a couple of past links I found in a few minutes, if you really need them,

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/canucks-gamble-pearson-extension-pose-future-salary-cap-issues/

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/jim-benning-paid-full-price-for-tanner-pearson-when-he-needed-a-bargain-3619791

 

I don't know how you missed that talk at the time.  evolving-hockey.com is a respected advanced stat site. Their projections for Pearson were similar to most other hockey pundits.

 

Again, its not that he was overpaid, its just that with the flat cap, hometown player, with the cap crunch everyone could see coming and with needing to re-sign other important players, every $ was precious.  So to see him offered more than what the hockey writers world thought he could have been signed for, was slightly disconcerting at the time.  I think mostly because it was a continuation of a pattern by our previous GM with aging vets. Its not a huge deal. I shouldn't have mentioned it. I didn't know it would be so upsetting to suggest he could have been had for less.  A good team needs a few contracts where players play above their cap hit especially with the support players.  He's just not one them, and he could have been.  I like Pearson though. I'm happy with his cap hit.  Its a new Jim era. Slate is clean. Swallow the half mill and move on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[IBatch]

18 minutes ago, kilgore said:

 

Not sure what you are so mad about bro.  Spelling?

I think Pearson is worth the 3.25.  Did you want to pay him more? IMO he was paid what he was worth. Not less. I've heard Scotch whisky is made from barley and the morning dew on angel's nipples. Its a good thing.

 

I can go and find past articles by writers that questioned the amount and timing at the time. Graphs like that were honest projections.  Here's a couple of past links I found in a few minutes, if you really need them,

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/canucks-gamble-pearson-extension-pose-future-salary-cap-issues/

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/jim-benning-paid-full-price-for-tanner-pearson-when-he-needed-a-bargain-3619791

 

I don't know how you missed that talk at the time.  evolving-hockey.com is a respected advanced stat site. Their projections for Pearson were similar to most other hockey pundits.

 

Again, its not that he was overpaid, its just that with the flat cap, hometown player, with the cap crunch everyone could see coming and with needing to re-sign other important players, every $ was precious.  So to see him offered more than what the hockey writers world thought he could have been signed for, was slightly disconcerting at the time.  I think mostly because it was a continuation of a pattern by our previous GM with aging vets. Its not a huge deal. I shouldn't have mentioned it. I didn't know it would be so upsetting to suggest he could have been had for less.  A good team needs a few contracts where players play above their cap hit especially with the support players.  He's just not one them, and he could have been.  I like Pearson though. I'm happy with his cap hit.  Its a new Jim era. Slate is clean. Swallow the half mill and move on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No worries.   I missed those, and tend to stay away from advanced sites given how silly WAR has become.   When Paul Stastny is declared the best player in hockey something is wrong with your modelling (awhile back now but i never forgot that, over prime Crosby and Bergeron, let alone a ton of other players)....Sportsnet is ok/decent.   I don't have much western media exposure - it's mostly eastern and can say folks were interested in him out here.   A cheap top six LW option in his prime.   Felt we'd trade him but the team obviously likes him and wants him there, and glad you see his value as well.   Elite shot, and one of the only guys we have that goes to the net (why that is - well Bruce i hope fixes that).    

 

And he's showing Rutherford he wants to stay too.   Peace Kilgore.   I love veterans, a team has to have them.   Pearson has earned his money since arriving and hope to see him keep it up - last season was a total nightmare.   Pearson did have a 5 game stretch after we signed him that was what we need to see from him ,,, and seems to have woken up under Bruce too.   

 

Edit: Elite shot - anyone who's in the NHL has a good shot.   Pearson had scored some really tough angled far corner lasers for us ..., doesn't get credit for it like EP or BB, but he's done it.  Streaky. 

Edited January 12, 2022 by IBatch

[wallstreetamigo]

19 hours ago, IBatch said:

No worries.   I missed those, and tend to stay away from advanced sites given how silly WAR has become.   When Paul Stastny is declared the best player in hockey something is wrong with your modelling (awhile back now but i never forgot that, over prime Crosby and Bergeron, let alone a ton of other players)....Sportsnet is ok/decent.   I don't have much western media exposure - it's mostly eastern and can say folks were interested in him out here.   A cheap top six LW option in his prime.   Felt we'd trade him but the team obviously likes him and wants him there, and glad you see his value as well.   Elite shot, and one of the only guys we have that goes to the net (why that is - well Bruce i hope fixes that).    

 

And he's showing Rutherford he wants to stay too.   Peace Kilgore.   I love veterans, a team has to have them.   Pearson has earned his money since arriving and hope to see him keep it up - last season was a total nightmare.   Pearson did have a 5 game stretch after we signed him that was what we need to see from him ,,, and seems to have woken up under Bruce too.   

 

Edit: Elite shot - anyone who's in the NHL has a good shot.   Pearson had scored some really tough angled far corner lasers for us ..., doesn't get credit for it like EP or BB, but he's done it.  Streaky. 

I would disagree he has an elite shot. He misses wide open nets from right in front more than pretty much anyone on the team. Like any nhl player, he can snipe once in awhile. Elite level shooters, imo, can score from anywhere and tend to convert not just the odd nice snipe but consistently put pucks in the net when they get chances. Pearson is too streaky to be considered elite at anything. 
 

Good player and fills a role but also the typical inconsistent effort/results that many middle 6 types have. It’s why they aren’t 1st line players or elite in most cases. 
 

He has played better under Boudreau (like pretty much every player) but if they traded him tomorrow it’s not like it would cripple the team like is being suggested on here. He is a replaceable player. 
 

Pearson is the classic chicken or the egg question. Is the line he is on better simply because of him or is he better on lines with elite level players? Probably some of both but as was seen previously with him and as is true with many players, his effectiveness, consistency, and production plummet when he is playing with less skilled players. That seems to indicate he is a good support guy not the play driver on the line he is on. 
 

It’s too bad Benning was so awful at cap management. Pearson will very likely be moved at some point if keeping the young core intact is the goal. As a 3rd line guy making less he would be a good player to keep. There just isn’t enough cap to go around though. 

[IBatch]

3 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I would disagree he has an elite shot. He misses wide open nets from right in front more than pretty much anyone on the team. Like any nhl player, he can snipe once in awhile. Elite level shooters, imo, can score from anywhere and tend to convert not just the odd nice snipe but consistently put pucks in the net when they get chances. Pearson is too streaky to be considered elite at anything. 
 

Good player and fills a role but also the typical inconsistent effort/results that many middle 6 types have. It’s why they aren’t 1st line players or elite in most cases. 
 

He has played better under Boudreau (like pretty much every player) but if they traded him tomorrow it’s not like it would cripple the team like is being suggested on here. He is a replaceable player. 
 

Pearson is the classic chicken or the egg question. Is the line he is on better simply because of him or is he better on lines with elite level players? Probably some of both but as was seen previously with him and as is true with many players, his effectiveness, consistency, and production plummet when he is playing with less skilled players. That seems to indicate he is a good support guy not the play driver on the line he is on. 
 

It’s too bad Benning was so awful at cap management. Pearson will very likely be moved at some point if keeping the young core intact is the goal. As a 3rd line guy making less he would be a good player to keep. There just isn’t enough cap to go around though. 

I said verbatim: "Elite shot - anyone who's in the NHL had a good shot.   Pearson had scored some really nice tough angled far corner laser's for us..., doesn't get credit for it like EP or BB but he's done it.  Streaky" 

 

Of course he's not Ovi.   EP has scored all of 2 even strength goals for us so far this year ... the point of this thread is Pearson doesn't get much credit for what he does - or adds and i just wanted to give him some props for his shot - it's actually pretty decent.    Wasn't trying to say he's an elite shooter, of course he's not, he's not terrible either.    Miller and Horvat have also done this.... Personally i thought we were still rebuilding and needed extra cap which is why i thought Pearson would be on his way out.   JB had other plans, obviously they want him around for at least this year....And since Bruce took over he seems to be re-invigorated which is great to see too.  

[DrJockitch]

7 minutes ago, IBatch said:

I said verbatim: "Elite shot - anyone who's in the NHL had a good shot.   Pearson had scored some really nice tough angled far corner laser's for us..., doesn't get credit for it like EP or BB but he's done it.  Streaky" 

 

Of course he's not Ovi.   EP has scored all of 2 even strength goals for us so far this year ... the point of this thread is Pearson doesn't get much credit for what he does - or adds and i just wanted to give him some props for his shot - it's actually pretty decent.    Wasn't trying to say he's an elite shooter, of course he's not, he's not terrible either.    Miller and Horvat have also done this.... Personally i thought we were still rebuilding and needed extra cap which is why i thought Pearson would be on his way out.   JB had other plans, obviously they want him around for at least this year....And since Bruce took over he seems to be re-invigorated which is great to see too.  

Show me an NHL scorer who isn't streaky, isn't on a rookie deal and makes under 6 million.  

If a scorer is consistent in the NHL they are elite players and even then they run hot and cold just to a greater and lesser extent respectively.

[Me_]

Tanner Pearson Is the Most Criminally Underrated Canuck

 

Naw man… Keith Ballard was the most criminally underrated Canucks all-time.

[Devron]

What makes him underrated are the people that do not understand all the aspects of the game. He’s very inconsistent on the score sheet but when he’s scoring it’s usually in bunches. He plays the right way.
 

I can’t even remember a goal against that Pearson was the culprit.

 

Basically on par cap hit wise with the rest of the league for what he brings.

 

And lately he’s been sticking up for his teammates. Although that seemed to be a culture thing with Green is why we are seeing more fight from our guys. 
 

Seems like a character guy. I don’t understand what there is not to like. Maybe it’s the people that think Ritchie and his cap hit is a better player lmao

[wallstreetamigo]

On 1/13/2022 at 12:57 PM, IBatch said:

I said verbatim: "Elite shot - anyone who's in the NHL had a good shot.   Pearson had scored some really nice tough angled far corner laser's for us..., doesn't get credit for it like EP or BB but he's done it.  Streaky" 

 

Of course he's not Ovi.   EP has scored all of 2 even strength goals for us so far this year ... the point of this thread is Pearson doesn't get much credit for what he does - or adds and i just wanted to give him some props for his shot - it's actually pretty decent.    Wasn't trying to say he's an elite shooter, of course he's not, he's not terrible either.    Miller and Horvat have also done this.... Personally i thought we were still rebuilding and needed extra cap which is why i thought Pearson would be on his way out.   JB had other plans, obviously they want him around for at least this year....And since Bruce took over he seems to be re-invigorated which is great to see too.  

I was simply saying that “giving him some credit” or “his shot is pretty decent” and claiming he has an “elite shot” are different things.

 

Pearson is a guy who is not great at or terrible at anything. That has value as a depth guy.

 

But if it comes down to letting go of a guy like EP, Horvat, Miller, or Boeser due to butchered long term cap management by Benning, I trade Pearson ahead of any of them 100 times out of 100.

Edited January 15, 2022 by wallstreetamigo

[canuckleheads fan]

What I'm blown away by is Pearson's ability to fight. He's dropped the gloves three times in the last few weeks, has won two of those fights outright and the third wasn't long enough to name a winner. And he's not tilting with small guys, I think every guy he's fought has been bigger than Tanner. That's another factor in his game that makes him valuable, especially for a coach who doesn't seem to mind the rough stuff.

[RU SERIOUS]

On 1/9/2022 at 10:35 PM, Toyotasfan said:

Sometimes you don’t notice him for awhile in regular season play , but he would compliment any playoff team, he could fit into Tampa’s lineup seamlessly , he does the grunt work.

I agree and fully expect he'll be traded while he still has any sort of tangible value.    I strongly suspect that when JR starts the rebuild towards a much faster skating team, he'll be one of the first to go.   No way JR keeps this assembly of slow turtles together for another season.   

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, RU SERIOUS said:

I agree and fully expect he'll be traded while he still has any sort of tangible value.    I strongly suspect that when JR starts the rebuild towards a much faster skating team, he'll be one of the first to go.   No way JR keeps this assembly of slow turtles together for another season.   

Expect he's all clauses up this season....and pretty sure he's playing to stay right now.    That said you never know, maybe he waives. 

[aqua59]

On 1/8/2022 at 12:21 AM, Rindiculous said:

Yes, it's me again, with another topic, because I'm bored with almost no games for the past 3 weeks.

 

However, I was reading a Canucksarmy article that basically listed all the Canucks in tiers for how likely they would get traded.  While most I agreed with, Tanner Pearson was put in the "Trade 'Em If You Can" tier.  This tier basically said that if anyone gave you any value for that player, you make that trade in a heartbeat.  He was joined there by Hamonic and Poolman, who I completely agree should be in that tier, but having Pearson there struck a nerve with me because I've seen many people with the same opinion and I disagree 100% with anyone who says Pearson is not worth his contract value this year.

 

Yes, Pearson had a bad year last year.  So did almost every single Canuck with the exclusion of Brock Boeser.  However, this year is completely different.  Pearson is criminally underrated in this market and has been since he was traded here. Even with his 'slow' start (which wasn't really slow as I show below), he's almost on pace for 40 points this season, and he's worth so much more than the points he puts up. Almost the entire year, the line that he has been on has been the best Canucks line whether it was him Hog and Bo at the beginning of the year to him, Bo, and Garland, to most recently him, Miller, and Boeser. He's a catalyst to each and every line at 5 on 5. He's not flashy but he's good defensively, and very good in puck battles along the boards. He's 5th on the Canucks in +/-, is a prominent player on the PK, and has the third...THIRD best expected goals for % of the entire team only behind Brad Hunt (who has seen very limited action) and Conor Garland. On top of that he is THE BEST Canuck in the Scoring Chance % department meaning that he's on the ice for the more scoring chances for than against better than any other Canuck on the roster.  He's the type of grind it out player you need on every line to open up space for your snipers and playmakers.  It's no fluke that every line he gets put on suddenly becomes the Canucks best line by both the eye test and statistically.

 

You won't see much interest in him around the league because he isn't flashy or puts up a ton of points, but almost everyone in and out of our market severely underrates Tanner Pearson. They look at him whiffing on the odd scoring chance and think he's just bad and not worth his own weight. But this year Pearson has been worth every penny of his contract more than almost anyone paid more than him in this lineup with the exception of JT Miller and possibly Quinn Hughes and Conor Garland.

 

And the last thing is most people like Tanner Pearson, but for some reason hate his contract.  Well, he's not making 3.75 mill a year anymore.  This year he got signed to 3.25 mill AAV.  What top 9 player that is consistently playing first or second line minutes is signed for that low a contract?  Basically noone except for maybe Marcus Foligno who is having a career year this year in Minnesota.  For what Pearson provides on a night in and night out basis I'd consider a bargain rather than an overpayment.  He's definitely earning his contract way more than the likes of Pettersson, Boeser, Dickinson, Poolman, and Hamonic and dollar for dollar there could be an argument he's got more bang for his buck than OEL and Myers.  The only one he's definitely not outperforming dollar for dollar is Miller, and if that's the case, it's not a bad contract seeing as Miller's is probably a top 5 contract in the entire league.  Also, for people who say that the contract might not age well cause he's old, the guy is still only 29, only signed for 3 years.  He'll be 32 when the contract expires when most players are still in their prime.

 

So in closing, we should hold on to Pearson for sure because obviously he would not bring much value in a trade, and he is worth way, Way, WAY more to us than anything we could possibly fetch in a return on a trade.

What? Pearson has been average at best. Never consistent in effort.

 

Why did Pittsburg trade him in the first place? because they afford to let him go.There's little value in this guy now. 

 

I look for management to improve at his position very soon. This guy pedestrian at best.

[RU SERIOUS]

8 hours ago, IBatch said:

Expect he's all clauses up this season....and pretty sure he's playing to stay right now.    That said you never know, maybe he waives. 

For sure, he's definately playing harder than we've seen for a long while and likely because he's trying to stay here.