View Single Post
08-20-2012, 01:38 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Detroit
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,123
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Heaton View Post
None of this shows any context of the teams and who is on them. But Ericsson is viewed as a long term fix, Hannan is what? I don't disagree with the idea that a team needs to find cheap options for certain positions, but I don't agree that you should try to do that every year or every other year. Eventually you'll want stability.

We can point towards Samuelsson and Cleary for junk pile players that we've found and we can point to other players that the other 29 teams collectively find each year. But the chances of finding those players, having them fit AND work while exceeding expectations year in and year out is asking a lot.
My take on this philosophy is that the main incentive to use junk pile, bargain players to fill out the roster is so you can have a highly skilled, highly paid core. That is where stability matters most, IMO. If a team has a solid core, they will be competitive no matter who gets plugged into the remaining spots as a cheap roster filler.

Here, we have cap space to burn and we haven't been able to acquire the types of players who could potentially make that an issue. This doesn't mean that I agree with Ericsson's contract... it just means it isn't as problematic as it could be. If you took Datsyuk and Zetterberg and added in Suter and Parise's contracts, then the situation changes. Now cap space becomes important, and having continuity on the 4th line or 3rd pairing doesn't.

Talent is what wins, not a cohesive group of so-so players. Compounding the problem is that as the so-so players are retained their salaries push them well out of the realm of bargains. Cleary, Bertuzzi, Samuelsson... all were once a deal, but not anymore.

doublejack is offline   Reply With Quote