View Single Post
Old
07-20-2012, 04:34 PM
  #11
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,925
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFist View Post
I don't think it says that Nashville can't compete with the bigger clubs. I do think it says ownership did a risk/reward evaluation, and that's the solution they came up with.

Think about it this way.... What if Shea Weber were to turn into our own version of Rick DiPietro? Not only do you have around $7.5 million tied up in annual cap room, but you have all that bonus money tied up in virtual cap money. If ownership is commited to spending more money, then that money needs to be spent on actual players, not tied up in one player's bonus. It's not like ownership's going to magically churn up the bonus cash without having it effect payroll cap spending.

besides, one player doesn't win a cup.
Two things - I admit that there's a tremendous amount of risk involved, but there's risk involved in everything.

Suppose he stays healthy, wins multiple Norris Trophys, and one spring Rinne gets hot, we hit on a few young forwards, and we bring home a cup. Would that be worth it?



Next, if ownership is committed to spending more money, where is it?

We had holes on this team prior to Weber/Suter. Where was the money spent? Am I supposed to believe, that, for like the 4th consecutive free agency period - that there was absolutely not one single player that could have helped us?

If we're truly committed to spending more money, how come we hover around the cap floor every single year?

Let's face it, if guys like Weber/Suter really believed that we were a franchise that was truly going to go all out every year to win a cup, they'd still be here.

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote