Mikko Koivu Signed To Massive Extension- Still Expected To Average 51 Points A Season

Mikko Koivu, the newly minted franchise player for the Minnesota Wild, was signed to a seven year, $47.25 million dollar contract extension yesterday, which adds up to about a seven million dollar cap hit per year, give or take a few hundred thousand. Many around the hockey community have questioned the move, wondering if he is truly worth the money. Still, though the skepticism is valid, the GM of the WIld certainly seems to be confident in his move. When asked about the price Chuck Fletcher, franchise running extraordinaire, basically said that you can't rely on stupid things like total points, or goals, or other statistics when it comes to signing players to long term contracts that give them exorbitant amounts of money. I for one, totally agree with him. I mean, imagine what the world would be like if people were rewarded for concrete results that were created due to their efforts. That's why I like the Chris Drury contract. No, he doesn't y'know, score any goals or provide any offense, but hey, he kills penalties and plays on the Rangers' third line to only the tune of like 6.5 million dollars. Plus, he immensely ups the team's midget-bird factor, which is ridiculously important.

So I guess the question to ask now really is, how good is Mikko Koivu really? Is he a two way franchise player, capable of scoring 70 or 80 points a season? Or is he really just a pretty good player, who can score you sixty (or seventy on a good year) and can be held defensively responsible? Who knows? But what I do know is this, never pay players according potential. Never. Unless they're young, like a Jack Johnson or a Marc Staal, it will always be a mistake. A player needs to earn a contract, just because you think he can be a superstar (even though he hasn't been for his last five seasons and is now twenty seven, past the point of development), you shouldn't pay him like one. That's why players push in contract years, because they want to prove that they're worth the kind of money they think they deserve. Additionally, arbitration isn't based on potential, it's based on history, and for good reason. Payment is a reward for production, not vice versa. Fletcher has argued that Koivu would arguably be one of the most coveted centers to go UFA in an extremely long time, which is preposterous. Koivu, though good, is not worth this kind of money, and the move really makes me wonder what's stupider, the fact that he believed the bluff that he'd be this valuable on the open market, or the fact that he truly believes he's worth the money.