Frig it, Johnson gets another thread
View Single Post
03-14-2007, 01:23 PM
Join Date: Jun 2002
Originally Posted by
err...but a 50pt player...on the third line? We barely have a 50 pt player on the team let alone one on the third line making half the salary of our top guys. Besides, Schaefer plays on a power racked team which I would think is the only reason why he sometimes plays on the 3rd line if not the 2nd. As for Hecht...err...doesn't he play on the first line? Beside Briere? I would think if Johnson played on the first line all the time his point production will increase by a fair margin also...
As for Peca and Draper...would love to have them on this team but how many Pecas and Drapers are out there?
Besides, although I would love to sign all players for ridiculously low prices, how many first liners (ala Hecht) who are "UFA's" get signed for peanuts in this league? It's one thing to bring up kids from the system and pay them peanuts but last I checked, signing UFA's isn't exactly a cheap thing.
We finally have a player who we generally all like and not cussing all the time, are we in such a hurry to get rid of him? Bottom line, imo, this team is better WITH Johnson than without.
[edit: as for Bonk, I didn't mind him this year and think he did well. I wouldn't mind him coming back but only at a reduced salary. Otherwise I think he's just too slow]
I suppose you're missing the point. Johnson earns in the Hecht/Schaefer salary bracket and isn't as good as them. And yeah, Hecht plays the top line in Buffalo, but he's also played the third line frequently and bounced all over the lineup. His stats remain virtually the same, unlike Johnson's. Same goes for Schaefer.
But the point is that these players (among many, many others) earn in the same salary bracket as Johnson yet outproduce him, and I'd also take Schaefer or Hecht's fundamentals over Johnson's.
Re: Peca and Draper. I suppose you're missing the point again.
Just because there
aren't many out there
(which I don't necessarily agree with, but will save that dispute for another time) doesn't mean Montreal should overpay for players not as good as them, paying them in the same salary bracket.
I don't think the fact that Johnson's likeable and generally solid fundamentally should make him above reproach. Montreal needs to be fiscally responsible going forward, and I don't think spending much on the bottom-six is fiscally responsible--especially when said players aren't producing enough offense, and/or aren't producing enough intangibles.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Mike8