View Single Post
Old
09-10-2009, 12:08 AM
  #61
Winky
Registered User
 
Winky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaasa View Post
Have you not read a single Heatley to SJ thread this offseason? Sharks fans have been saying that it's not about skill, it's about cost. And a minority of us don't want Heatley because of his attitude. But This trade would not be Heatley for Marleau straight up, even if that is what Murray would take. The Sharks would then have to clear about another $1 million in cap space just to fit Heatley. But then they also need more cap space to replace the player they just moved to fit Heatley in. And then rather than having almost $20 million coming off payroll this coming summer to re-sign Pavelski, Setoguchi, Joslin, Moore, possibly Nabby and Marleau, AND deal with a declining cap; the Sharks now have $7.5 mil tied up in Heatley, which will likely cost them one of their good young players on top of what they paid for Heatley, and on top of whoever they had to move to fit Heatley into the roster.

The Sharks depth sucks as it is. Adding Heatley is a train wreck to the team now and for the rest of contract. And yes, I personally think he's a locker room poison waiting to happen, and wouldn't want him on my team even if he came for free.
Its amazing how many times you have to explain this ****, and people still can't seem to grasp the fact that a trade involving players with multi-year contracts affects the team down the road, and can indirectly result in said team being forced to move other players as a consequence of said trade.

Even if the Sharks acquired Heatley for a bag of **** tomorrow, we would then be forced to move 1-2 of our young, core players (i.e. Setoguchi, Pavelski, Michalek, Clowe, etc. etc. etc.) due to Heatley's large, multi-year contract. So it would cost us those young players, plus the bag of ****.

Winky is offline   Reply With Quote