Thread: Speculation: UFA Thread
View Single Post
05-13-2013, 05:13 PM
Iron Duke
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Fontana, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,609
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
remember its not our money.

as long as paying player "X" a certain amount of money doesnt prevent us from signing (or re-signing) a more important player "Y" later, then would you rather have an asset we need or have the owners have a little more money in their pocket?

Everyone "overpays" for UFAs. If we want one, we will have to overpay. If they fill a need and their salary doesnt put us in cap trouble(or internal budget trouble) then i have no problem with it
Depends on the term. Stalberg at $4M for 2 years is one thing, at $4M for 5 years is another. It's ok to overpay when we have the space, but overpaying for too many players, and for the wrong length can handcuff our ability to make moves later. Teams like Philly, NYR, etc... can get away with that because they can bury contracts and eat buyouts, we can't.

Iron Duke is offline