View Single Post
01-24-2012, 11:08 AM
Registered User
BillDineen's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,681
vCash: 500
I am really struggling to understand the logic here. With both the team and the fan base.

This team struggles with inconsistency defensively and the argument is that the defense really misses Pronger. But with Carle at 4.5mm, the money on D spent without Pronger would be among the highest in the league (too lazy to check all). This goes on top of the high paid goalie we now have.

Do we really have to pay up for an slightly above average defenseman? I honestly think Gus will be as good as Carle in two years. (I admit I have always hated Carle so I am biased).

Money spent on top four assuming Carle gets 4.5mm:

Flyers (no Pronger): 19.33
Chicago: 17.59
Detroit (with Lidstrom at 6.2 again): 16.2
Boston: 14.66
Rags: 9.85
Pens: 16.25
Nucks: 16.55

Nashville with 15mm on Weber and Suter would still be lower than the Flyers with their young D.

Yes I know we need more young up and coming D, but Bourdon and Gus are decent relative to their cap hit.

Seems like everything with top paid top 4 D who can be inconsistent and a top paid goalie who has been inconsistent is completely assbackwards.

BillDineen is offline   Reply With Quote