View Single Post
Old
01-08-2013, 10:28 AM
  #51
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,674
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmelm View Post
I don't deny it's a bit of a crazy idea, but I have always viewed things this way in the salary cap world. Sure, if a guy like Sutter was a home-run next to Sid/Geno, then you do it, to heck with the financial consequences. But if the improvement from a guy like Jeffrey/Tangradi to Sutter is only sublte, then I think it's a factor.


I'm not just looking at having to re-sign all the guys we have, and there's a lot of them (Geno, Letang, Sutter, Kennedy, Cooke, Dupuis - although I think the latter two can get done at a reasonable cap hit), but we're also going to want to make a run at Jarome Iginla, or perhaps even look to trade for a guy making some good coin. It may or may not be an issue, but we have to see how things shake out with these contract extensions, buy-outs, and possible incoming trade or UFA options.
Yeah I definitely understand what you mean. The long term benefit of "saving" Sutter's offensive potential until he's re-signed is a great thought. If you could conceivably lock him up at 3mil for 3-4 years take a run at Iginla and then have him explode on the wing with Sid/Geno, we'd be freakin stacked.

That said, in your comment I interpreted it (and maybe a bit too harshly) as sacrificing the present for future gains which we should never do. I personally don't think Sutter will provide some huge offensive gains over Jeffrey/Tangradi in the near term anyway, so I suppose it's a moot point anyway.

Shady Machine is offline   Reply With Quote