View Single Post
Old
03-04-2012, 04:57 PM
  #122
SMoneyMonkey
Registered User
 
SMoneyMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LA/MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nex06 View Post
Best case scenario? Why don't you tell me what's the worst case scenario? Remember, we are talking about getting rid of Quick BEFORE we know how good Bernier is. This off-season. So... we don't know how good Bernier is. We only know that Quick is really good. But we trade him anyway. Ok, your turn now, tell me what the worst case scenario is.
No we're not. I didn't say anything about trading Quick. I just said that best case scenario is that Bernier is better than Quick. Everybody should want him to be better than Quick. He'll be an RFA longer and a lower cap hit.

Worst case would be all our goalies sucking from here on out.

I don't agree with not resigning Quick. That's your overly defensive "Quick Fan" stance speaking, not me.

I think Quick is better.
I think we should resign Quick.
I think Quick is more than good enough to be #1 here.

I think Bernier hasn't had a chance to show how good he is.
I think Bernier could be better.
I think it's in the Kings best interests to know how good Bernier is.
I think it's too late in the season to start giving Bernier more starts.
I think Terry Murray must have devised an intricate and revolutionary equation in order to discover the worst way to handle two young, promising goaltenders.

I know Bernier is an RFA.
Quick will deserve a higher cap hit this season than Bernier would if he played lights out next season.
Therefore: I think it's in the Kings best interests that Bernier is the better goalie.

If it's true then we get:
A better goaltender, under a low cap hit for the next season who will probably remain at a lower cap hit than Quick for the next 3-4 seasons.

SMoneyMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote