View Single Post
Old
06-21-2005, 08:58 PM
  #66
Kodiak
Registered User
 
Kodiak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ranger fan in Philly
Posts: 2,185
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Kodiak Send a message via AIM to Kodiak Send a message via Yahoo to Kodiak
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666
but what has Betts done that would warrant getting resigned other than being 25?

The fact that it would be a total waste of valuable funds is argument enough not to sign a player that misses 75% of his teams games.
Waste of valuable funds? Betts is making $500k. If he's affected by the rollback (still up in the air at this point, but I haven't heard of the rollback Brook mentioned since January), he'll make $380k. League minimum salary will be at least $300k when the new CBA is signed. How much cheaper do you think NHL players can get?

Quote:
The fact that he's limited in every aspect of the game itself is another reason that we should pass and finally, there's a whole farm team full of players that can and should play his position.

Blair Betts = Ken Gernander a career AHL'er that may get a cup of coffee, like throwing a dog a bone.
That's a pretty bold statement to make, pld. How many times have you seen Betts play? Betts is an NHL player. He earned a regular spot with the Flames before he was injured again. Right now, a healthy Betts is more effective at the NHL level than Giroux, Moore, Murray, and Hollweg, just to name a few.

People, this is the same song and dance we've been through numerous times. If a player isn't a star, then he's deemed replaceable and pushed aside, that is, until a few years go by and we realize that he would fit pretty nicely into our lineup. This is a young, cheap forward with leadership abilities who plays a sound defensive game and kills penalties. Why, after the past 7 years, are some of you so eager to ship out this type of player?

Kodiak is offline