The Mikhail Grigorenko Thread
View Single Post
01-22-2013, 11:43 AM
Big Daddy Ted
Join Date: Nov 2009
Originally Posted by
This would be a Golisano/Quinn era argument, but it's extremely doubtful Pegula/Black will worry very much about burning a year of his ELC eligibility. If he's helping the team and giving us a better shot at success by being up, he'll stay. (which is what you said, agreeing with you)
Burning a year of his ELC isn't just about cold hard cash (the Golisano/Quinn concern), it's also about sound and responsible cap management. In order to build an elite team in this NHL,
with the cap coming down considerably, you need young guys on super-cheap contracts. It's just good business sense.
Basically if they think there's a very low chance they win anything this season with or without Grigs, and that playing in the Q won't be overly negative for Grigs' development / playing in the NHL won't be overly positive, you could argue the smart thing to do is to send him back down no matter what and buy an extra season of him at a crazy-cheap cost.
I wouldn't fault them for taking the stance that they're going to send him down unless his actual excellent play (think Myers as a rookie) forces their hand and gives them no choice. I'd rather have Grigs on an ELC in a season where we have a better shot at the Cup than this one. And I hate myself for saying that.
All that said I think he'll stay just because he looks like he belongs, we don't have better options, and they'll be worried sending him down will stunt his growth. That means someone else's gotta get waived or traded though.
Two of those guys have to go, whether by demotion (Grigs), waivers (Ellis, Scott) or trade.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by HarryNealesGarden