View Single Post
Old
12-07-2012, 11:34 AM
  #71
henchman24
If and if...
 
henchman24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 16,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
That's a lazy argument.

Paying Stastny $6.6M/year is not a player giving Avs trouble contract wise but paying Stewart $2.25M/year is?

Under Sherman, what players have they gotten rid of? Quincey and Stewart were moved in trades to gain something we currently don't have. If there were any problems with Stewart it had more to do with his behavior and not with his contracting demands.

Lacroix may have had an issue with players holding out, but there is no reason to assume Sherman has. In this case, it's not even a player holding out but more both parties agreeing to suspend negotiations until they knew what the new CBA looked like.

Relax. Don't panic. Have some chocolate milk.
It isn't about the actual money, it is paying players more than they are worth. Yes, you can argue Stastny is overpaid (though he would get that as a UFA), but he wasn't trouble to negotiate with nor has he been a cancer at any time.

Quincey - was going to demand too much money, and had attitude issues with the coaching staff
Stewart - was going to demand too much money for a player with a poor work ethic
Anderson - he demanded too much in the Avs minds after one good year, he pouted and they sent him off
Wolski - see Stewart

All of those players had contract issues and were sent out. The Avs did what they could to bring back the most value, but everyone except maybe Stewart, the writing was on the wall. Those trades are all under Sherman.

Lacroix still has his hands in things. No doubt about it. Lacroix made some exceptions in the past, see Sakic, but the overall organization has pretty much said if you are going to demand too much money, you will be sent packing.


Last edited by henchman24: 12-07-2012 at 11:40 AM.
henchman24 is online now