×

Don’t underestimate Crosby’s value

Despite Sidney Crosby’s average of 1.33 points per game – the fifth best in NHL history – the Pittsburgh fan base has criticized his latest performances as subpar for a player with a $102 million contract.

They argue that trading Crosby to clear cap room would be beneficial for the hockey club.

Primarily, comparable to the star athletes of any sport, Crosby has had his ups and downs, but he consistently redeems himself and performs well above the league standard.

Crosby began the 2015 season on a slower pace than usual, with only six goals in his first 32 games. With the help of a coaching change, Crosby returned to an unrivaled scoring streak.

He scored a league leading 38 points in the next 29 games, and later went on to win his second Stanley Cup, as well as the Conn Smythe trophy as Stanley Cup playoffs MVP.

Secondly, some skeptics may argue that players who take a smaller cap hit such as Phil Kessel or Bryan Rust could make up on the scoring chances that could potentially be lost by a Crosby trade.

However, Crosby is constantly smothered by the opposing team’s best defensive pairing every moment he’s on the ice. So while Crosby himself may not be scoring all of the goals, his ice presence provides opportunities for his teammates to score.

This has allowed him to have a positive plus-minus for nine out of his 10 seasons. If Crosby were to be traded, his teammates wouldn’t be able to score as many goals due to the team’s best defenders now covering someone not as skilled as he is.

Any average hockey fan can determine that a Crosby trade would be the most detrimental management decision in Penguins’ history.

Ty Gilkey

Mineral Point

House bill would be

disaster for deer

I am a certified wildlife biologist with 47 years of experience in deer research and management, with 25 of those years (1988-2013) in Pennsylvania.

The proposed House Bill 2083 to be voted on by your representative is a deer disaster that will cause harm to all Pennsylvanians while benefiting the small minority of the state’s population comprised of deer hunters who want to see more deer during hunting season.

The bill would basically double deer density and take the state back to the 1980s and 1990s where there were so many deer that deer-car collisions were prevalent (about 50,000-plus per year).

Many people were hospitalized as a result, and a few died as well.

Farmers couldn’t raise crops without significant damage and economic losses. Homeowners had serious damage to landscaping. Forest landowners couldn’t grow trees without costly fencing, and with the added cost of herbicides to eliminate overabundant deer-caused fern problems, Lyme disease was on the rise.

Other game species’ habitats were simplified by deer browsing, the species reduced in abundance (e.g., try and find a place to hunt snowshoe hares and grouse), and rare plants were endangered or eliminated at alarming rates.

Representatives voting for this bill are placing the desire of some but not all hunters over the well-being, safety and health of all their constituents, including the hunters themselves.

David deCalesta

Crossville, Tenn.

(Editor’s note: The writer is formerly from Warren, Pa.)

NEWSLETTER

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *
   

Starting at $4.39/week.

Subscribe Today