View Single Post
Old
12-01-2008, 04:34 PM
  #30
Lucius
Registered User
 
Lucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
Hmm. For me the motivation is to improve in the most immediate short-term on the O'Byrne/Brisebois spot, not replace Bouillon. I have confidence in O'Byrne working out in the somewhat longer term, but I don't mind procrastinating a bit on his growing pains. Although we should probably expect to have at least 1 d-man almost perpetually injured, that's a more fair NHL-wide model, I think.

Swapping out Bouillon for Preissing would definitely make us smaller... "play smaller" is all that matters there, and I wouldn't want to do it.

I do fear Preissing's contract potentially representing an impediment to some of our upcoming players in future years. Although when you look around the league at what defensemen in general are signing for, it shouldn't be an immovable contract if we do find ourselves with youngsters ready and with a need to re-invest that cap space elsewhere.

I guess it comes down to the pricetag. If LA was trying to cut the contract loose for almost no return, I'd take him. If they want something "real" for him, no thanks.
Well, yes, I was arguing a hypothetical. The ideal, though, to me is to keep O'Byrne in a 10 minutes a game. For the cap to work, Bouillon and Dandenault make the absolute most sense. Perhaps Begin and Kosto would equal them, but you see.

If we keep Bouillon, either he, O'Byrne, Gorges or Preissing need to sit in a healthy lineup, ON TOP of Brisebois. That is not a good spot, I don't think.

Lucius is offline   Reply With Quote