[Shadow Flyer]

Originally Posted by Larry44

Well, they wanted Meszaros more than they wanted to having him go somewhere else while missing out on Michalek or Volchenkov too (having missed on Hamhuis).

I have no problem trading a 2nd pick for a 25 year old Dman who will very likely be an absolute stud for us for years to come. None at all. Esp. on a team that is ready to challenge again. Marshall was picked in the 2nd round how many years ago?

I'm glad you don't have a problem with paying your #5 defenseman $4M in a salary cap era. And to say that Meszaros is "likely" to be an "absolute stud" for years to come is a bit of hyperbole, to say the least.

Originally Posted by Larry44

As far as trading Gagne, get over it. It was a salary dump of a player they wanted rid of. As I documented on here before, Gagne said he was asked to waive about a month before he was dealt, right around June 18 or 19 when they acquired Hamhuis' rights.

That means in the week after they lost out, they did an assessment and decided Gagne had to go as priority one.

Yes, because their assessment was based on the asinine notion that it's wise to pay your #5 defenseman $4M per year.

Originally Posted by Larry44

What does that tell you? It tells me they had to think about it for, oh, five seconds to decide. Which tells me they'd decided to do it long before that.

It tells me they aren't exactly in the upper tier of the league in deciding how to best manage their cap space and assets.

Originally Posted by Larry44

Why? We may never know. They may have still been mad that Gagne risked his season (although not the $5.25M the Flyers owed him) because he rushed back from surgery in a bid to make Team Canada when he wasn't healthy enough. That kind of thing ticks the Flyers off.

Or it could just be that Paul Holmgren is the only GM on the planet that thinks it's best to pay a #5 defenseman $4M per year to try and cover up a career backup goaltender because he failed to acquire an upgrade in a buyers' market. Could be that too.

Originally Posted by Larry44

Whatever the reason, when they sat down to assess the season and plan for the next one, the first things on the agenda were:
1. upgrade the D
2. get rid of Gagne to do it.

Well, if this is true, then the fact that goaltending was not on that to-do list, and the fact that it was thought to be a good idea to upgrade our 3rd pair by throwing $5M combined cap dollars at it, along with losing our best two-way winger (and taking a salary dump in Walker as part of the return), suggests that maybe we need someone else making the decisions for this franchise.

Originally Posted by Larry44

And I really think they like Walker, so despite his high salary, he will can a valuable role player this year, in what should be a contending year. Then, if O'Donnell walks, they'll have Walker for the 3rd pairing to play with one of the kids.

In a non-cap league, having Walker as a 7th defenseman making $1.7M would be great. However, here in the land of reality, its not feasible.

Originally Posted by Larry44

Oskars, well, I like him but he's not really THAT good that he will be missed if they have to deal him. Marshall will be ready by next year, or maybe Bourdon or Gustafsson or Bodrov.

And if they can't deal him and lose him for nothing on waivers? That's ok too? Basically, it would be ok to overpay Walker and lose Bartulis for nothing because we have other players in our system? That's wonderful logic, and a great way to spin horrible asset management.

Originally Posted by Larry44

This idea that they coulda, shoulda, woulda done something else ignores the fact that the decisions teams make are done in real time.

And clearly some of these decisions are "real time" mistakes, but a good many people will continue to defend them regardless.

Originally Posted by Larry44

It's easy to sit back and say, well, they could've had Volchenkov instead of Meszaros if they waited. IF is the operative word.

It's also easy to say that they could have waited and signed another 3rd pair guy for around $1M (like every other team in the league), but that would also make sense too, so we can't have that.

Originally Posted by Larry44

And some would argue that Mez is a better overall player, and there was no guarantee that Volch could be obtained. Bird in the hand at 11:45 on July 1 is better than two in the bush you never catch after 12 noon.

Doesn't matter what some would argue because it's irrelevant. We didn't need Meszaros or Volchekov or any other defender of that caliber making that much coin. Upgrading a teams' 3rd pair defense isn't rocket science and should never cost $5M in cap space to get done. Period.

Originally Posted by Larry44

They tried to get Nabby and Turco, who had other agendas. They signed Leighton, then looked at Ellis too, but he preferred Tampa. What can you do?

Not re-sign Leighton before free agency even starts and instead, for roughly the same cap hit, offer Chris Mason the chance to be the #1 on a Cup contending team?

Originally Posted by Larry44

Many teams fail in their bids to upgrade or replace players (see LA).

I don't know what you do for a living, but at my job, if I fail...I don't have a job. It doesn't matter what the excuse is, the bottomline is that failure is failure.

Originally Posted by Larry44

Homer doesn't. You can whine about the price or the salary all you want, but Homer has shown he can make the tough decisions he needs to make to get the players he wants.

He's also shown a great ability to **** up our cap structure, both now and in the future, and also a great ability to leave our prospect cupboards all but bare and piss away a ton of draft picks and assets. So yea, he's done well there too.

But hey, he got the players he wanted. It's not like overpaying or underselling your assets to do so has any relevance in a salary cap world or anything.