View Single Post
07-01-2011, 07:39 PM
Registered User
buddahsmoka1's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: México, D.F.
Country: Mexico
Posts: 25,057
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Monaco88 View Post
What can we expect from him?
30G 30A ?????
I expect more 25/25 from a healthy season. I doubt he will break 60 with the Habs, when someone like Cammalleri even takes a dip in production here.

I think the biggest X factor in his production is going to be the PP. I have seen Carolina fans say he is not very effective on the PP, and his stats back that up. But, I also don't remember Carolina ever having a top 5 PP(correct me if I am wrong). Stick him in front of the net on the second unit, and he could pick up those numbers. We saw a lesser talent in Darche do well there with our strong PP.

Originally Posted by macavoy View Post
The Molson's have cheaped out and cut costs.
Once again, where is the evidence to support this? The two contracts you just listed, have little or nothing to do with the Molsons. These are hockey moves, yes they are determined with weight on salary, all things are, but these are at the first and forefront, hockey moves, not financial ones.

AK should have been signed to a 2 year deal if not 3. Now we lost him next year or pay him $5m. Cole, Laich and Leino all got $4.5m after he signed and he'll have more points than all 3 of them next year.

Even if AK isn't a part of our future, you sign him longer and trade the asset instead of letting it walk away.
First of all, the Habs seem to value flexibility in contracts, and players proving themselves, before handing them long term contracts. We saw this with even some of their future core pieces for example, Plekanec. When Montreal re-upped Pleks for one year, he was then able to pursue UFA after that contract. When Pleks proved himself, they gave him a fair and secure contract as a reward. Same thing with Ryder, except he managed to never gain the allure of the brass, and was let go.

It is a method of keeping your RFAs in check, and managing them both fairly, and keeping the overall status of your contracts flexible.

Is there other approaches taken out there in the league? Surely. Does that mean the Habs are cutting costs? Please.

Same thing with Wiz, we could afford the $0.75m extra that CBJ gave him. Then we could have traded him next year for a legit top 6 forward. You don't throw away assets to save a dollar or two now like NYI. You spend now and reap the rewards later.
Its not just about that. Its about committing huge amounts of money and term, to a guy that the brass do not believe is worth, or will hamper you down the line. I also don't think Wiz with a 5.5 cap hit, and a 6 year contract, is as easy to move as you think.

I am just not on the same level with a lot of posters here who believe that you must get an asset for every single player that leaves your club.

For one, the asset you guys covet so much, is of little value in the grand scheme of things, a draft pick for example. Secondly, what is so horrible about letting a UFA walk? Hammer was signed for 4 years, gave us 4 solid years, was given an offer a couple days ago. He decided to move on, we said thanks for everything, good bye. This is how it works in the real world. The asset was USED, we got 4 seasons of Hammer, not lost. Same with Kostitsyn, say he has an average or below average season this year, and he decides to go elsewhere next summer. We drafted Kostitsyn, he has played 6 years for our team, once again, he has been used, not lost.

Trading all your assets at the deadline, or for re-wealth is a process that typically takes place in teams that are not making the playoffs on a consistent basis. They covet assets because their current assets on their playing team are not good enough. Consistent playoff teams covet the assets that are on their current playing team more than the ones that aren't.

In an ideal world, you want to get assets for expendable players when the time is right. We have done that, O'byrne for example, or Rivet. There is a time and place for it, sometimes you cannot avoid losing players to free agency, its the nature of a contractual business.

Just because we signed two contracts today, doesn't make us in the elite spenders of the league.
I am not even sure what qualifies one as an "elite spender." All I know is this basic fact, we spend to the cap every single season.

Want me to go back to the microscope? That took a long time to type out.

buddahsmoka1 is offline