View Single Post
10-28-2003, 07:32 AM
Join Date: Jun 2002
Originally Posted by
I hear what you are saying but there are a couple of differences. First Smolinski is/was not known for being a team leader. Which is what Ricci currently is. Second SJ's attendence is off by 15-20% with their AHL style lineup, they cannot afford to deal Ricci for a prospect and picks if they do they will get more red ink than than they are losing now. If nothing else Ricci stays to bring in the fans, (or to try to keep what they have.)
the second point makes a lot of sense...
and that's why from the beginning I suggested that the Sharks only move him if they are out of the playoffs by the deadline... in mid March you take your chances then, and try and rebuild again in the offseason - which makes a lot more sense than holding on to him and letting him walk as a UFA player for basically playing out 8-10 meaningless games (assuming they are out of the playoffs by then). (ofcourse this also has a lot to do with what the Sharks believe are their chances to retain him as a UFA player).
In such a situation, attendence is a non-issue... if they lose him as a UFA in the offseason, how is that any better than dealing him 10 games before the offseason for an asset?
the first point though can be taken both ways... yes Ricci is a valuable on-ice leader, and a reason why (although not the biggest reason) teams that are looking for a playoff push will be after him (and such teams aren't about to give up their valuable assets which they also need for the playoffs to get him)... but you can flip the argument from Smolinski's side too... Smolinski was the better offensive player last year, and has been primarily been used in a top 6 situation more consistently than Ricci has - and that on a more competitive team... plus he's a versatile player, being able to play all 3 forward positions as well.
And he doesn't exactly lack in experience either... IMO doesn't have the same leadership that Ricci has, but he's still an experienced guy.
The reason why I suggested that leadership won't be the biggest reason why teams will be interested in him, is because teams that are adding soon to be UFAs at the deadline are usually playoff/Cup contenders, who aren't really lacking greatly in leadership to begin with... they'd want him more for his intangibles and experience on the ice, then his leadership - and although as an asset his value may be more because of his leadership ability, teams aren't going to be paying much more for something they don't need as much.
but IMO the best way to find out a guys value is by comparing him to other players in the market (recently as the market has been changing) who are comparables - he's not in the Blake category of soon to be UFAs, but guys like Smolinski are closer to value...
anyone know of other UFAs dealt in the past season or two at the deadline, and what kind of value they brought?? I just don't think that Ricci should for some reason be considered any differently than other comparable assets.
View Public Profile
Visit NFITO's homepage!
Find More Posts by NFITO