HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Notices

Vokoun took less money to play with Capitals because 'I want to enjoy hockey'

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-30-2011, 12:37 PM
  #26
DUHockey9
Registered User
 
DUHockey9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hogwarts
Country: United States
Posts: 4,472
vCash: 500
I'm no economist but let's examine what was this past offseason's goalie market.

Teams needing a goalie:
Flyers
Avs
Lightning
Capitals (possibly. Varlamov was a question mark.)

Goalies available:
Bryzgalov
Vokoun
Roloson

I did a quick search on being "first to market" and found something that I think is extremely applicable in our situation.

Quote:
Conventional wisdom says being first to market creates a competitive advantage. Reality is more complicated. Market opportunities are constantly opening and closing, and a hit idea at one point could be a dud a year earlier or a yawning "me too" business a year later. It's tough—likely impossible—to pinpoint the best moment to enter a market, but common sense dictates new entrepreneurs can improve their odds if they weigh how much they stand to gain or lose by waiting.
http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz...519_306313.htm

Homer decided to be first to market (tends to be his strategy overall). He got his man. So be it. We got a goalie.

Cross off the Flyers and Bryzgalov.

Then Roloson re-signs with TB.

Cross off the Lightning and Roloson.

Then the AVs go insane, and trade a boatload for Varlamov.

Cross off the AVs, but now the Caps are clearly in the market, with only one FA goalie left.



To suggest that people are crazy for insinuating that one of the goalies might come at a real bargain is...well...crazy. 3 goalies, 3 buyers. 4 if you really believed the Caps.

I never saw anyone specifically say that Vokoun would sign for X dollar amount; but I did say people say something along the lines of "it's very possible that someone (presumably Vokoun) comes at a bargain". It was REALLY apparant after the Varlamov trade. There was 1 goalie, and 1 buyer. He was either signing there, or not signing at all (or at least not anytime soon).


Last edited by DUHockey9: 08-30-2011 at 12:44 PM.
DUHockey9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 12:40 PM
  #27
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
This post is embarrassing for you. Where does it say Washington was the only team left so I signed there? When I read it it said I wanted to play for a winning team so after receiving disappointing offers, we called Washington and went there. Please show me what you are talking about when he said that he had no other options, because maybe I read a different article where it said he got other offers that were disappointing and then made first contact with the Caps and signed there. Oh wait, I have the quote right here:



I guess that article is different from the one you are reading.
Oh. My. God.

He didn't say **** about there not being other options. He didn't need to. Why? Because, as you and I discussed last spring, anyone with half a *ing brain, and an internet connection can tap "www.espn.go.com" into their web browser and look at NHL rosters. As if by magic, when you do that you can see which teams have goalies and which teams do not have goalies. If you want to get even more into it, you can type in "www.capgeek.com" and see what the contractual structure of teams are. Also, again as if it were *ing magic, you can see what teams are paying goalies and how long they are paying goalies for.

Upon completion of this exercise that most pre-K students can probably pull off you will arrive at a point where your knowledge is expanded to the point that you would know the following.

As free agency opened the following teams were potentially looking for a goalie: PHX (mess of a situation), TB (they signed Roloson), COL (they traded for a goalie...), and WSH (were iffy, and then had room...). I'm leaving out FLA, because clearly Vokoun didn't want to sign there.

That's it after we signed Bryz.

TB - taken
COL - taken
PHX - who wants to sign into that situation
WSH - the only stop left if you want to be on a playoff team on July 2nd.

I mean, seriously, you are *ing fascinating in how dense you are and how committed you are to defending every last *ing thing that Paul Holmgren and the Flyers do. To the point that you construct the ignorant fantasies that make it out like the stuff we say is crap just pulled out of our a**.

WASHINGTON WAS THE ONLY TEAM LEFT FOR VOKOUN.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 12:41 PM
  #28
DUHockey9
Registered User
 
DUHockey9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hogwarts
Country: United States
Posts: 4,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Ok. So you never said would or whatever, then why are people making a big deal and acting like Homer absolutely blew it? A lot of things COULD have happened. Like I said, they COULD have missed out on both or paid more for one or the other. Why is that less valid than they COULD have signed one for less?
I'm certainly not acting as if Homer blew anything.

I'm totally fine with everything that went down with Brygalov. Homer's method has it's risks, but I'm glad we have a goalie.

I just don't like when it's implied that I'm crazy for thinking a goalie might become a bargain.

Yes you could say we might miss out on a goalie entirely, or pay a lot more, the issue is. There is NOTHING that would suggest that would happen. Why would that possibly happen based upon the number of goalies on the market and the number of teams that needed goalies?

Seriously. I'm not trying to be an ass or condescend you; but do you really not get the basic principles of supply and demand? One scenario was far more likely than another (scenarios being A-you get left with no one/overpay or B-you get a bargain).

DUHockey9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 12:51 PM
  #29
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
I'm certainly not acting as if Homer blew anything.

I'm totally fine with everything that went down with Brygalov. Homer's method has it's risks, but I'm glad we have a goalie.

I just don't like when it's implied that I'm crazy for thinking a goalie might become a bargain.

Yes you could say we might miss out on a goalie entirely, or pay a lot more, the issue is. There is NOTHING that would suggest that would happen. Why would that possibly happen based upon the number of goalies on the market and the number of teams that needed goalies?

Seriously. I'm not trying to be an ass or condescend you; but do you really not get the basic principles of supply and demand? One scenario was far more likely than another (scenarios being A-you get left with no one/overpay or B-you get a bargain).
No, he doesn't.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 12:57 PM
  #30
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,360
vCash: 500
I'm content with getting Bryzgalov over Vokoun.....heck actually I'm just happy we finally got a bonafide goalie still in his prime. Barring any unforseen disaster injuries he should basically fill the number 1 goalie role for a good portion of his contract (4 to 5 yrs) similar to Luongo when he was acquired. Now hopefully Bryzgalov is better than LeBrongo (the playoff version of Luongo) and I suspect he will be but it's not like Vokoun has a playoff track record to base his added value going forward either. What we do have with Vokoun is that he is older, faced a lot of rubber, had back issues last year, and could be the next Beezer (too little too late).

Bryzgalov has more upside and we had to pay for it..period. We've gone for the blue light special in net for too many years now and has bitten us in the butt. It was time for a paradigm shift and whatever comes of it so be it. Plus it seems after the Boston series minds were made up on a lot of things and one of them was Snider giving his diktat to Holmgren to go after the best goalie possible out there given many variables. That looked to be Bryzgalov from the outset...so all these hypotheticals about whether we could have had Vokoun or should have had him instead of Bryzgalov are basically moot since Snider and the Flyers pretty much had their guy tabbed right away. Maybe it was impulsive on the Flyers part and a valid argument can be made in that respect but it's not like their decision to go after Bryzgalov is going to turn out into some unmitigated disaster in the DiPietro category...god forbid.

Added for emphasis:



Last edited by FreshPerspective: 08-30-2011 at 01:36 PM.
FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 01:35 PM
  #31
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoom View Post
I'm content with getting Bryzgalov over Vokoun.....heck actually I'm just happy we finally got a bonafide goalie still in his prime. Barring any unforseen disaster injuries he should basically fill the number 1 goalie role for a good portion of his contract (4 to 5 yrs) similar to Luongo when he was acquired. Now hopefully Bryzgalov is better than LeBrongo (the playoff version of Luongo) and I suspect he will be but it's not like Vokoun has a playoff track record to base his added value going forward either. What we do have with Vokoun is that he is older, faced a lot of rubber, had back issues last year, and could be the next Beezer (too little too late).

Bryzgalov has more upside and we had to pay for it..period. We've gone for the blue light special in net for too many years now and has bitten us in the butt. It was time for a paradigm shift and whatever comes of it so be it. Plus it seems after the Boston series minds were made up on a lot of things and one of them was Snider giving his diktat to Holmgren to go after the best goalie possible out there given many variables. That looked to be Bryzgalov from the outset...so all these hypotheticals about whether we could have had Vokoun or should have had him instead of Bryzgalov are basically moot since Snider and the Flyers pretty much had their guy tabbed right away. Maybe it was impulsive on the Flyers part and a valid argument can be made in that respect but it's not like their decision to go after Bryzgalov is going to turn out into some unmitigated disaster in the DiPietro category...god forbid.
Ah, it might. Not saying that's the most likely outcome, but I'm not sure why it's taken off the table either... especially for an older goalie.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 01:38 PM
  #32
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Ah, it might. Not saying that's the most likely outcome, but I'm not sure why it's taken off the table either... especially for an older goalie.
Yeah and Hurricane Irene might have been a Cat 5....

Again it's a calculated risk with more upside than downside...at least IMO.

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 01:42 PM
  #33
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoom View Post
Yeah and Hurricane Irene might have been a Cat 5....

Again it's a calculated risk with more upside than downside...at least IMO.
We need to stop with this crap down here... Vermont is *ing destroyed by that storm. The "it wasn't that bad" stuff is ignoring the fact that we were lucky as hell.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 01:45 PM
  #34
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
We need to stop with this crap down here... Vermont is *ing destroyed by that storm. The "it wasn't that bad" stuff is ignoring the fact that we were lucky as hell.
Still wasn't a cat 5..never said it wasn't bad. The flooding is definitely bad....but neither here nor there.

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 01:49 PM
  #35
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoom View Post
Still wasn't a cat 5..never said it wasn't bad. The flooding is definitely bad....but neither here nor there.
I just find the Daily News headlines yesterday to be disgusting.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 01:50 PM
  #36
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,364
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
I'm no economist but let's examine what was this past offseason's goalie market.

Teams needing a goalie:
Flyers
Avs
Lightning
Capitals (possibly. Varlamov was a question mark.)

Goalies available:
Bryzgalov
Vokoun
Roloson

I did a quick search on being "first to market" and found something that I think is extremely applicable in our situation.



http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz...519_306313.htm

Homer decided to be first to market (tends to be his strategy overall). He got his man. So be it. We got a goalie.

Cross off the Flyers and Bryzgalov.

Then Roloson re-signs with TB.

Cross off the Lightning and Roloson.

Then the AVs go insane, and trade a boatload for Varlamov.

Cross off the AVs, but now the Caps are clearly in the market, with only one FA goalie left.



To suggest that people are crazy for insinuating that one of the goalies might come at a real bargain is...well...crazy. 3 goalies, 3 buyers. 4 if you really believed the Caps.

I never saw anyone specifically say that Vokoun would sign for X dollar amount; but I did say people say something along the lines of "it's very possible that someone (presumably Vokoun) comes at a bargain". It was REALLY apparant after the Varlamov trade. There was 1 goalie, and 1 buyer. He was either signing there, or not signing at all (or at least not anytime soon).
I understand the idea, but what I am saying is that it doesn't guarantee anything. Some people, and maybe not you, are acting as if Homer totally blew it and we could have had Vokoun for far less. Which very well may have been possible. But it isn't by any means a guarantee and I don't understand why signing an elite goalie to a long term deal instead of a different, older elite goalie to a shorter term deal is being treated as if it were a catastrophic decision (and I don't mean you, because you obviously don't feel that way).

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 01:50 PM
  #37
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 37,253
vCash: 156
If Bryz's play drops off in a few years, it's bad...and it's definitely a possibility. Few goalies play well into old age, definitely not at a 5.6 mil level. We would then have a lesser goalie at a big hit who we can't trade, and who won't have incentive to retire or go to Russia since he makes a lot of money through most of it.

We don't necessarily need a Category 5 Hurricane DiPietro situation for that contract to go wrong fast...let's hope that he puts Brodeur and Roloson to shame in terms of old-man play.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 01:53 PM
  #38
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,364
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Oh. My. God.

He didn't say **** about there not being other options. He didn't need to. Why? Because, as you and I discussed last spring, anyone with half a *ing brain, and an internet connection can tap "www.espn.go.com" into their web browser and look at NHL rosters. As if by magic, when you do that you can see which teams have goalies and which teams do not have goalies. If you want to get even more into it, you can type in "www.capgeek.com" and see what the contractual structure of teams are. Also, again as if it were *ing magic, you can see what teams are paying goalies and how long they are paying goalies for.

Upon completion of this exercise that most pre-K students can probably pull off you will arrive at a point where your knowledge is expanded to the point that you would know the following.

As free agency opened the following teams were potentially looking for a goalie: PHX (mess of a situation), TB (they signed Roloson), COL (they traded for a goalie...), and WSH (were iffy, and then had room...). I'm leaving out FLA, because clearly Vokoun didn't want to sign there.

That's it after we signed Bryz.

TB - taken
COL - taken
PHX - who wants to sign into that situation
WSH - the only stop left if you want to be on a playoff team on July 2nd.

I mean, seriously, you are *ing fascinating in how dense you are and how committed you are to defending every last *ing thing that Paul Holmgren and the Flyers do. To the point that you construct the ignorant fantasies that make it out like the stuff we say is crap just pulled out of our a**.

WASHINGTON WAS THE ONLY TEAM LEFT FOR VOKOUN.
So what about the other teams that made him offers? They don't count? The article said he had OFFERS with an S. We know the Flyers didn't offer him anything. We know the Caps didn't offer anything because HE called THEM. So who else offered him a contract? Do any contracts he didn't sign not count as options? Because, as I have been saying, maybe he just wanted to go to Washington to begin with. In which case, the Flyers had no chance to get him any way. Which is why I am saying you can't act like if Bryz didn't get signed Vokoun would be here or even could have been here, because we don't know what else was going on.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 01:54 PM
  #39
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,364
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
I'm certainly not acting as if Homer blew anything.

I'm totally fine with everything that went down with Brygalov. Homer's method has it's risks, but I'm glad we have a goalie.

I just don't like when it's implied that I'm crazy for thinking a goalie might become a bargain.

Yes you could say we might miss out on a goalie entirely, or pay a lot more, the issue is. There is NOTHING that would suggest that would happen. Why would that possibly happen based upon the number of goalies on the market and the number of teams that needed goalies?

Seriously. I'm not trying to be an ass or condescend you; but do you really not get the basic principles of supply and demand? One scenario was far more likely than another (scenarios being A-you get left with no one/overpay or B-you get a bargain).
What if the bargain in scenario B is not the goalie you want? That is my point. Sure, we may have overpaid for Bryz, not saying we didn't. I am not a fan of the long contracts for anyone, especially not a goalie. But I'd rather have overpaid for Bryz than have gotten a bargain that we are replacing in two years anyway.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 01:57 PM
  #40
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
I just find the Daily News headlines yesterday to be disgusting.
WIP was also being a bit harsh...but then that is the norm. Cataldi thinks he's Howard Stern...

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 02:03 PM
  #41
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
So what about the other teams that made him offers? They don't count? The article said he had OFFERS with an S. We know the Flyers didn't offer him anything. We know the Caps didn't offer anything because HE called THEM. So who else offered him a contract? Do any contracts he didn't sign not count as options? Because, as I have been saying, maybe he just wanted to go to Washington to begin with. In which case, the Flyers had no chance to get him any way. Which is why I am saying you can't act like if Bryz didn't get signed Vokoun would be here or even could have been here, because we don't know what else was going on.
DFF, using the formula I just described above... I bet you can figure out some of the teams that likely made an offer. I would all but guarantee you PHX did, for example. Unless you think they're thrilled with that group.

And I'm not acting like if Bryz didn't get signed Vokoun would be here... I'm acting like it was a *ing option that could have been pursued. God forbid the Flyers make any decisions after July 31st because we're all pissing ourselves that we may not end up with who we want.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 02:12 PM
  #42
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,364
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
DFF, using the formula I just described above... I bet you can figure out some of the teams that likely made an offer. I would all but guarantee you PHX did, for example. Unless you think they're thrilled with that group.

And I'm not acting like if Bryz didn't get signed Vokoun would be here... I'm acting like it was a *ing option that could have been pursued. God forbid the Flyers make any decisions after July 31st because we're all pissing ourselves that we may not end up with who we want.
Well I guess I just misinterpreted yours and other people's posts because I was under the impression that folks were acting like it was written in stone. Obviously it was an option. There are plenty of options out there. Even ones that we never discussed.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 02:15 PM
  #43
DUHockey9
Registered User
 
DUHockey9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hogwarts
Country: United States
Posts: 4,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
What if the bargain in scenario B is not the goalie you want? That is my point. Sure, we may have overpaid for Bryz, not saying we didn't. I am not a fan of the long contracts for anyone, especially not a goalie. But I'd rather have overpaid for Bryz than have gotten a bargain that we are replacing in two years anyway.
We're talking specifically about good, starting level goaltenders (Bryz, Vokoun, Roloson, and in this case Varlamov) as well as contending teams that needed a goalie (Avs kind of being the exception).

Come on man, it's really not hard to get this. As this article clearly indicates, Vokoun wanted to play for a contender badly. It's quite easy to see who those contenders were, coming into this offseason.

DUHockey9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 02:18 PM
  #44
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,163
vCash: 500
Why do people continue trying to argue with Jester? He's the most obstinate, bone headed, most stubborn character I've ever seen.

Could the Flyers have waited and had Vokoun at a bargain? Possibly, but it's far from a guarantee. If they didnt pursue Bryzgalov, they could have been left with no goalie. An overpaid goalie is better than no goalie.


And I dont know why we continue to assume that Vokoun would have signed with us. Clearly he wanted to play for the Caps. Who's to say he would have even signed here if we offered?

hockeyfreak7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 02:18 PM
  #45
DUHockey9
Registered User
 
DUHockey9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hogwarts
Country: United States
Posts: 4,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
DFF, using the formula I just described above... I bet you can figure out some of the teams that likely made an offer. I would all but guarantee you PHX did, for example. Unless you think they're thrilled with that group.

And I'm not acting like if Bryz didn't get signed Vokoun would be here... I'm acting like it was a *ing option that could have been pursued. God forbid the Flyers make any decisions after July 31st because we're all pissing ourselves that we may not end up with who we want.
There it is again DFF. "Could have".

And to the last sentence that Jester writes, as my earlier excerpt indicated, being first to market (as Homer is hell bent on being) has its risks in itself.

DUHockey9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 02:22 PM
  #46
tuckrr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
I'm certainly not acting as if Homer blew anything.

I'm totally fine with everything that went down with Brygalov. Homer's method has it's risks, but I'm glad we have a goalie.

I just don't like when it's implied that I'm crazy for thinking a goalie might become a bargain.

Yes you could say we might miss out on a goalie entirely, or pay a lot more, the issue is. There is NOTHING that would suggest that would happen. Why would that possibly happen based upon the number of goalies on the market and the number of teams that needed goalies?

Seriously. I'm not trying to be an ass or condescend you; but do you really not get the basic principles of supply and demand? One scenario was far more likely than another (scenarios being A-you get left with no one/overpay or B-you get a bargain).

I think the bottom line is:

would it be worth it to risk getting nothing for the chance to get a bargain?

when you factor in that we were moving richie/carter I say ABSOLUTELY NOT.

could you imagine how bad we'd be w/ boucher and our current roster (probably minus jagr)


given this, (that we arent taking the risk, and are going after bryz) it isnt bad negotiating to officially declare you want bryz.

doing so definitely lowered his cap hit. It started a good relationship: he wanted to win, then (after snider stepped in) he wanted to win with us!

(so he shaved off about 500-750k)

tuckrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 02:24 PM
  #47
DUHockey9
Registered User
 
DUHockey9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hogwarts
Country: United States
Posts: 4,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfreak7 View Post
Why do people continue trying to argue with Jester? He's the most obstinate, bone headed, most stubborn character I've ever seen.

Could the Flyers have waited and had Vokoun at a bargain? Possibly, but it's far from a guarantee. If they didnt pursue Bryzgalov, they could have been left with no goalie. An overpaid goalie is better than no goalie.


And I dont know why we continue to assume that Vokoun would have signed with us. Clearly he wanted to play for the Caps. Who's to say he would have even signed here if we offered?
No on is assuming any such thing.

All anyone is arguing is that the idea that one of these goaltenders (probably Vokoun) would end up being a bargain, was possible to foresee.

Serisouly people. Where do you really think these goalies were going to sign. Go back in time a couple months. Please lay out for me the teams that were in the market to sign a goalie. Then lay out for me the available goalies.

DUHockey9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 02:29 PM
  #48
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfreak7 View Post
Why do people continue trying to argue with Jester? He's the most obstinate, bone headed, most stubborn character I've ever seen.

Could the Flyers have waited and had Vokoun at a bargain? Possibly, but it's far from a guarantee. If they didnt pursue Bryzgalov, they could have been left with no goalie. An overpaid goalie is better than no goalie.


And I dont know why we continue to assume that Vokoun would have signed with us. Clearly he wanted to play for the Caps. Who's to say he would have even signed here if we offered?
We had Bob. Who played very well for this team last year. Would I and everyone have been uncomfortable with him on a Cup contender just now? Yep... do I think we're a Cup contender after the Richards and Carter trades? Nope.

In a few years, you may not agree with the bold if Bryz doesn't live up to that deal... and that's before getting into the hairy later years of the contract.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 02:29 PM
  #49
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
No on is assuming any such thing.

All anyone is arguing is that the idea that one of these goaltenders (probably Vokoun) would end up being a bargain, was possible to foresee.

Serisouly people. Where do you really think these goalies were going to sign. Go back in time a couple months. Please lay out for me the teams that were in the market to sign a goalie. Then lay out for me the available goalies.
So then why are we having this discussion if we're not assuming Vokoun would sign with us?

We were never going to get a goalie at $1.5m.

Vokoun could have signed in Colorado. Washington would have kept Varlamov, and Bryzgalov could have ended up in Florida.

Who does Philly get? If we're pushing Bryzgalov to wait so we can see what we can get Vokoun for, there's a chance that we lose him. After going decades with no goalie, no one wanted to run that risk.

hockeyfreak7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2011, 02:29 PM
  #50
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,364
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
We're talking specifically about good, starting level goaltenders (Bryz, Vokoun, Roloson, and in this case Varlamov) as well as contending teams that needed a goalie (Avs kind of being the exception).

Come on man, it's really not hard to get this. As this article clearly indicates, Vokoun wanted to play for a contender badly. It's quite easy to see who those contenders were, coming into this offseason.
Your whole supply and demand theory doesn't really work in this situation. He received multiple offers. He took less money to play for the Caps. Supply and Demand doesn't really calculate externalities like personal choice. If this were a case of four goalies and four teams all on equal footing, then yes, waiting would have been ok and we would have had one of four goalies for a reasonable price. But all things weren't equal. Bryz was arguably the best goalie. Vokoun was second, and the others fell somewhere after that. I would prefer the best player available, but that is just me. And maybe Vokoun is the best and maybe Bryz is, but if I'm the GM I want the best guy and I am gonna go after him. You want to field the best team possible. Remember when the Flyers signed the Beezer because he was cheaper? That worked out great...

Vokoun has also indicated that he wanted to play for a winner. Did he consider Philly a winner? More so than Washington? Who knows. That is what I am saying. It isn't as simple as just a one for one switch. Obviously the Flyers COULD have signed him if they waited. But they also COULD have signed Bryz if they waited. And they COULD have made a trade for Stamkos or Doughty. And they COULD have signed Brad Richards. And so forth and so on. I am not arguing that it wasn't a POSSIBILITY that he would sign here, but some people seem to be acting like it was more than a possibility. Just go back and look at the Scott Hannan thread.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:35 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.