View Single Post
Old
03-24-2013, 10:37 PM
  #32
WeekendAtBernies
Registered User
 
WeekendAtBernies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,718
vCash: 500
I don't feel like quoting all that, so I'll address a few things:

1. Projecting revenue growth is not extremely short sighted. My projections are extremely conservative, as they are using the same 5% per year revenue growth that the NHL actually uses to set the salary cap each and every year . It's in the cap formula. I didn't just pull projections out of my butt. And the NHL since the last CBA has grown quite more than 5% year over year, so 5% is definitely a conservative estimate.

2. I guess you and I see Giroux differently. I see him as being far more productive and a far better player than Richards and/or Carter.

3. You don't need to take 4 cracks at finding a #1 defenseman. A trade for a defensive prospect and a high draft pick this year followed by another defenseman via the draft next year should be enough. There's no reason we need 4 more late 1sts. Contrary to your beliefs, good 2 way defensemen can also be acquired via free agency... guys like Seidenberg, Voynov, etc... obviously not the truly elite guys, but the second PMD types can.

4. You and I actually agree somewhat on the future... amnestying Bryz and Briere, etc. Beyond that though is where we have the disconnect. If we're freeing up all this money you're talking about, I don't see why we would also need to let Giroux go @ 8M. With Timonen, Bryz, and Briere all gone before Giroux needs his new deal, where's all that money going to go? And if we're truly going into the tank (which is what doing all the moves you're talking about would essentially be), what's the point in trading Giroux when we could trade an older guy like Hartnell? Hartnell would be like 35 before we're contending via your strategy.

That's why I'm saying I just don't see the long-term strategy here. You can't go out in a single year and just spend spend spend to fill all your needs via free agency, so if you let Giroux go, you're going to be without a #1C for a long time. And don't tell me Schenn or Couturier could fill that void, because that's basically the same as me saying that Jones + Rundblad would solve our #1D problem (and you just told me I was wrong there). You can't count on Schenn or Couturier being able to dominate a game offensively any more than I can count on prospects to fill our D needs.

You essentially want to turn this team into the Edmonton Oilers and I just don't see the need at all. Even if the cap doesn't rise one cent, and Claude Giroux gets 9M (high estimate), Brayden Schenn gets 5M (high estimate), and Sean Couturier gets 3M (high estimate), you're talking about a team that will have ~17.5M to spend going into 2014-2015, with the need to fill 2 defensive spots (one top 4 defender, one bottom pairing), perhaps 1 top-9 forward spot, and both goalie positions. And this is without penciling in our 2013 draft pick to the lineup, and if we've a top 5 pick, I don't see any way our pick isn't playing (cheaply) for this team in 2014-2015.

I think you're vastly overreacting to Giroux's cap hit. The fact is, the Flyers signed his last deal specifically so it ended when a lot of $$$ would be coming off the books. They have prepared for this and they can sign him without any adverse effects whatsoever.

There's absolutely no reason to let him go.

WeekendAtBernies is offline   Reply With Quote