: Player Discussion:
Simon Gagne remains unsigned
View Single Post
08-08-2013, 11:05 AM
Grave Before Shave
Join Date: Sep 2009
Originally Posted by
I'll take 82 games of Tye McGinn's tenacity over an injury prone, tentative Simon Gagne. Gagne's asset to this team would be on the power play, and not much else. His game has completely changed since the head injuries, it's a shame but it's not worth arguing over.
Completely incorrect though? That's a bit of a stretch, no? He hasn't been a factor since that cup run, in really any situation, for any team.
Last year I will agree, he wasn't playing great. Not terrible while on Philly, but he wasn't on my list of standouts for sure. But the prior three years he hadn't scored less than .5 PPG in a season. How is that not an effective player? Again, the health issues I get, but when he is on the ice, he was effective.
Originally Posted by
Broad Street Elite
You're looking at this is an incredibly short term light from a purely numerical perspective. My reasons for not wanting Gagne are pretty simple:
1. I think he's far too injury prone and we already have too many LTIR liabilities to risk plopping another player on and getting even more overage penalties than we already will have in 2014.
Who else is injury prone? Mesz (if he's even here)?
2. It's not that Gagne has to be better than McGinn et al. It's that he needs to be 2-3x as good to overcome the salary differential.
Really? What is Gagne's salary going to be? If it is $4 million, yeah then I would agree, but if it is between $1-$2 million, I'm not sure I'd agree with that.
3. I want there to be a spot for competition. We have a plethora of borderline NHL players right now between Laughton, McGinn, and, later in the year, perhaps Straka, Noebels, Akeson, Flannigan, etc. I want there to be something for those guys to come to camp and feel like they are fighting for. When you see guys fighting for a spot, it can improve everyone's game.
But it can also amount to nothing. A bird in hand is worth two in the bush. With the exception of Laughton (whom I have not included really my POV on this situation because I am not as convinced as most of you that he'll be playing 3W this season. though if he is I would rather have Laughton than Gagne), I think the absolute best you can hope for is a guy who can match Gagne's offensive abilities and maybe come close defensively. And that is at best. More likely it will be a guy who is not as good offensively and not as good defensively. Why put them out there simply because they are younger?
4. Gagne is a short term bandaid for a team that I believe is unlikely to be a cup contender this season. I don't see Gagne as putting us over the top and certainly don't view him as an option when we are ready to realistically win it all in 1-3 years.
He's not a bandaid, he's a better option than what we have. I'm not saying give him a ten year deal. Sign him for a year because he is better than what the Flyers have and he is presumably affordable. The Tye McGinn's of the world will still be here next year.
5. No other NHL team seems to be banging down the Gagne door right now either, so perhaps the take that he's a shell of his former self is shared by more than just the Flyers.
That may be true, and again, if that's the case, I don't want him. If he can't play in the NHL, I don't want him here. But there were also rumors around about the Flyers having a deal in place already so it may not be that teams aren't interested, but rather Gagne isn't interested.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by DrinkFightFlyers