You need to have a top tier defence or you are not winning the cup. You need to realistically have at least 3 legit top 4 dmen on the team to win, preferably 4.
Right now we have 2. That's not enough, plain and simple. If we keep Wiz, that gives us 3, and a wildcard in Emelin. At minimum it would give us a top 10 defence in this league, bordering on top 5. That alone would make us contenders, as long as Markov is healthy enough of course, which is a huge question mark on its own.
Are all these defenses (when they won those cups) what you'd consider top 5 defense in the league? Are those defense built with top flight 2 first pairings?
When you stop and look at it, what you need is 2 top guys (unless your team plays in Carolina) and the rest needs to be complementary, not elite.
The closest thing to a really stacked top 4 would be the 2010 Chicago team and the 2008 Detroit team.
Okay now I changed my mind about offering a contract for Hamrlik.
Bieksa signed with the Canucks, Pitkanen with Canes, Erhoff traded to the Isles and there is no way Wiz is coming back. Who would be left then on the market then? Kaberle? no thanks... Hamrlik could be our best option at this point.
Are all these defenses (when they won those cups) what you'd consider top 5 defense in the league? Are those defense built with top flight 2 first pairings?
When you stop and look at it, what you need is 2 top guys (unless your team plays in Carolina) and the rest needs to be complementary, not elite.
The closest thing to a really stacked top 4 would be the 2010 Chicago team and the 2008 Detroit team.
The 2007 Ducks had the best of the bunch on that group. Among that group, only the 06 Canes could not say that they had an argument of having a top 5 defence in the league. All of those teams have at least 3 legit top 4 dmen except Carolina, and they are also the furthest removed from present day. I think its safe to say that we need to have 3 legit top 4 guys, especially given Markov's health issues.
If it's for one season I don't mind at all. Hamrlik is still a good player and I think he'll continue to contribute if he plays a reasonable amount of minutes. I don't really see where he fits into the lineup, but the free agency group sucks this year and I'd much rather have a reliable veteran player than wasted, unused cap space.
At this point my logic is the same for Gomez as well. If there's nobody definitively better to replace him with we're better off giving him one more chance to start the season. Best case scenario, he produces. Worst case, he gets a diminished role and then it's easier to get rid of him next year when his salary goes down. My preference is that Gauthier try to make a trade to upgrade the position, but I don't see that happening.
The 2007 Ducks had the best of the bunch on that group. Among that group, only the 06 Canes could not say that they had an argument of having a top 5 defence in the league. All of those teams have at least 3 legit top 4 dmen except Carolina, and they are also the furthest removed from present day. I think its safe to say that we need to have 3 legit top 4 guys, especially given Markov's health issues.
So let me get this straight, Seidenberg and Boychuck are bonafide top defensemen?
Letang, Goligoski, Scuderi, Gill and Orpik were top flight defensemen 3 years ago?
Beauchemin, Huskins and O'Donnel, top flight?
Sarich? Sydor? Kubina back in 2004 top flight?
You're telling me these guys at those points in their careers where bonafide top 4 defensemen?
Surely it had nothing to do with those teams having great clutch offense and crazy goaltending...
Seriously, you don't need to answer my question as even when faced with facts, you remain blind and I don't feel like having a discussion about colors with a blind man.
You can get Wiz at that price and lock your D for the next few years.
I was obviously sarcastic. While I like Hamrlik, I would not offer him much more than 2.5M for one year.
And I do not think Wisniewski will sign for anything under 5M. Not my first preference, but I might be open to keeping him if Hamrlik walks, depending on the deal.
If it's for one season I don't mind at all. Hamrlik is still a good player and I think he'll continue to contribute if he plays a reasonable amount of minutes. I don't really see where he fits into the lineup, but the free agency group sucks this year and I'd much rather have a reliable veteran player than wasted, unused cap space.
At this point my logic is the same for Gomez as well. If there's nobody definitively better to replace him with we're better off giving him one more chance to start the season. Best case scenario, he produces. Worst case, he gets a diminished role and then it's easier to get rid of him next year when his salary goes down. My preference is that Gauthier try to make a trade to upgrade the position, but I don't see that happening.
With Hamrlik there are at least 3 realistic options to replace him with, so signing him before exploring every option to its conclusion is negligence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PyrettaBlaze
You can get Wiz for $4M? Keep dreaming.
You can get him for about 5 probably, which is better than Hammer at any price.
If tomorrow we hear that Hamrlik is back at around 4M, what's not to love about the deal...
Again, the fact that I'm certain Martin will give him minutes he can't handle and take ice time from developing young d men. Also 4 mill is way overpayment.
Edit: Opps! Just noticed you were kidding about the 4 million part. Sorry ha.
Last edited by supertzar: 06-28-2011 at 07:49 PM.
Reason: re-read OP's post
With Hamrlik there are at least 3 realistic options to replace him with, so signing him before exploring every option to its conclusion is negligence.
You can get him for about 5 probably, which is better than Hammer at any price.
What are those 3 options?
If you are referring to UFA players the habs could sign, what happens if they miss out and some desperate team offers Hamrlik a 2-year $9mil deal? There is nothing on the FA market and what there is will be overpaid.
It's clear you don't like Hamrlik, but on a one-year deal he's much better than nothing or an extreme overpayment.
