View Single Post
Old
06-20-2013, 09:23 PM
  #37
Random Forest
aka hockeyfreak7
 
Random Forest's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,334
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbage Goal View Post
Three things:

1) You're fixating on that one single year out of the entire Briere contract, coincidentally the one single year we made an impressive run with him that fits your argument. It's not as if that was our only chance with him or with who would replace him.
You're right I'm only focusing on one year. Because that one year deflates your entire premise.

Your argument is that we could have put that money to better use. I'm saying if you look at the 2010 team (ie, the "perfect" team we could have possibly put together) you will realize that Briere's contract did not prohibit us from filling the holes in the lineup.

Quote:
2) You just admitted there was a hole in goal. Doesn't matter if it was an organizational decision to skip out in goal or not. Fact of the matter is part of the reason we didn't have strength is goal is because of cap space and Briere took up 6.5 million of it.
We had a hole in net because 1) Emery went down with freaking avascular necrosis and 2) because management decided not to pursue other options at the deadline.

It had nothing. Nothing to do with Briere's contract.

Quote:
3) Fact of the matter is in multiple years of a 6.5 cap hit all we have to show thanks to for Briere is some good playoff performances, only one of which came anywhere close to a Cup. We never won a Cup with Briere and the fact of the matter is that in his entire duration here he took up a large chunk of cap space.
Don't see why this is an argument against him. He brought us closer to the Cup than we would have been without him. It's really that simple.

Random Forest is offline   Reply With Quote