Speculation: Wishful Thinking

[Pinkfloyd]

Originally Posted by Davidhye

I think Marleau at 7.5 is an overpayment too.
Kovalchuk was offered to sign with the Thrashers at a near 10mil caphit. The fact that he is even offered that much says something (and yes, it also says something about the management).

Besides, I think we need to look at salaries, rather than cap hits. Kovalchuk would've been making 11.5 million, while Marleau 6.9 and Hossa, for instance, 7.9.

Generally, UFA contracts are overpayments because you're competing with everyone that's interested when it comes to top talent. As for the Thrashers, they offered it at a point that they knew he wasn't going to take it...also known as a PR move.

As for salaries, I disagree. All of that is negotiable and is generally done at the preference of either the player or the team and not really a sign of a player's worth overall...especially when you compare two guys like Hossa and Kovalchuk who were taking cap circumventing contracts and a guy like Marleau who signed a normal contract.

[matt trick]

1. Ovechkin
1. Crosby
3. Malkin
4. Datsyuk
5. Backstrom
6. Sedin (that season was simply spectacular even if he never does it again)
7. Zetterberg
8. St. Louis
9. Parise
10. Getzlaf

11. Toews
12. Richards
13. Stamkos
14. Marleau
15. Thornton
16. Kovalchuk- one way
17. Gaborik- one way
18. B. Richards
19. Kane
20. Daniel Sedin
21. Heatley
22. Kopitar
23. Hossa
24. Semin
25. Koivu
26. Kesler

[MadmanSJ]

If I were building a team and had the choice to build around Marleau or Thornton.. I would take Thornton without any shadow of a doubt.

Sorry, Thornton is more valuable to a team than Marleau.. and this goes beyond goals, assists, or +/-. It's about what he does for a team, and that is significantly raise the play of his line-mates.

[Pinkfloyd]

Originally Posted by MadmanSJ

If I were building a team and had the choice to build around Marleau or Thornton.. I would take Thornton without any shadow of a doubt.

Sorry, Thornton is more valuable to a team than Marleau.. and this goes beyond goals, assists, or +/-. It's about what he does for a team, and that is significantly raise the play of his line-mates.

I can understand that line of thinking but I would go the other way and take Marleau. Yeah, Thornton makes his teammates better but the flip side of that coin is that the guys that he actually makes better become heavily dependent on him to do the work. That's not a team I want to build. Nobody is going to mistake Marleau for a supreme playmaker but his speed creates time and space for his teammates, he finishes very well, and is reliable in every situation. Nobody is going to be dependent on Marleau to do the work and that creates less of a crutch for players playing with him.

If Thornton wasn't so one-dimensional out of his own choosing, I'd think differently about him. However, because of his mental game, he limits himself and is not the leader I'd want for the team.

[Led Zappa]

Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd

I can understand that line of thinking but I would go the other way and take Marleau. Yeah, Thornton makes his teammates better but the flip side of that coin is that the guys that he actually makes better become heavily dependent on him to do the work. That's not a team I want to build. Nobody is going to mistake Marleau for a supreme playmaker but his speed creates time and space for his teammates, he finishes very well, and is reliable in every situation. Nobody is going to be dependent on Marleau to do the work and that creates less of a crutch for players playing with him.

If Thornton wasn't so one-dimensional out of his own choosing, I'd think differently about him. However, because of his mental game, he limits himself and is not the leader I'd want for the team.

So your biggest knock on Thornton is he is so good that others don't work hard once they play with him. Really? Your going with that?