not that it has much relevance but is there an easy way to figure out Latendresses points per game...points per every game he was contracted for. As I brought up earlier: if you think there is a good chance that the guy is going to be a PPG player for only 20 games you're going to let him slide in favor of the guy you expect a half point per game from for a complete season.
And as I replied with earlier your figures for how frequently Lats played are so bizarrely unrelated to reality that it defies explanation why you keep bringing it up.
And as I replied with earlier your figures for how frequently Lats played are so bizarrely unrelated to reality that it defies explanation why you keep bringing it up.
whatever you want to believe, injury history (or even "conditioning" history) is a consideration when offering contracts.
Did anyone else get a little disappointed that Russo basically said that we won't be bringing Lats back next season? I just have this feeling that his injuries are behind him and I can just picture him being a beast for whatever team he ends up on next..
Russo's comments about lats have always come off like they're some sort of personally bitter comments. No idea if they are, but he has not done any favors to himself by not sourcing those comments.
Russo's comments about lats have always come off like they're some sort of personally bitter comments. No idea if they are, but he has not done any favors to himself by not sourcing those comments.
when has Russo sounded negative about Latendresse? Or is it just a feeling you get? I haven't really noticed negativity from Russo (except for maybe a bit of eyeroll directed at Lundin) sounding personal; it's usually when he gushes over someone where he goes a bit over the objectivity line and I get a hint of personal interest. Like with his Spurgie.
when has Russo sounded negative about Latendresse? Or is it just a feeling you get? I haven't really noticed negativity from Russo (except for maybe a bit of eyeroll directed at Lundin) sounding personal; it's usually when he gushes over someone where he goes a bit over the objectivity line and I get a hint of personal interest. Like with his Spurgie.
Did you read his twitter exchange with llama today?
I think most of his writing towards Latendresse have been negative. Other than his beginning of the year story on him coming into camp fit, there hasn't been much to gush over. On the contrary, there hasn't been many times for him to be complimented considering hes out most of the time.
the whole argument that, "well XX player was drafted in the 2nd round...who needs top 5 picks" is terribly flawed...
the higher you are the higher your chances of getting a top player are, sure you can find diamonds in the rough but if you are playing the percentages you would much rather be as high as possible.
and having a shot at no 1 is huge since #1 is almost a sure thing franchise player these days
I think most of his writing towards Latendresse have been negative. Other than his beginning of the year story on him coming into camp fit, there hasn't been much to gush over. On the contrary, there hasn't been many times for him to be complimented considering hes out most of the time.
Even then, it was all backhanded compliments. Everything was "well the fatty finally showed up able to play." All the talk about coming back from injury was him not coming back fast enough, then coming back too early.
It was a completely practical opinion imo and I agree with him.
Playing time impacts contact offers. You don't gift $1 mil/year to a player you can't count on.
Well there are two different perspectives here.
From Fletcher's perspective, the ~$1M you could negotiate down makes literally no difference. We are so far under the cap, and unlikely to find players to throw that space at, that $1M extra for 1 year literally won't affect our roster in any way, shape or form.
From Leipold's perspective, I completely understand why not to throw that kind of money at Lats. But that's a personal and/or financial decision, and not a hockey one.
Sorry, hockey is a business, thus it's also a sound hockey decision imo. Every contract impacts every other contract negotiation. You pay what players are worth for the most part, or get those stats thrown against you in arbitration later.
Lats' situation is exactly the type that could cost you later in arbitration with someone else if you qualify him.
how many contracts do we have opening up as of this moment for next year? Enough to stay flexible for potential trades (getting more players than we give), mid-season FA signings (in case we run into long term injury problems and want to pick up a John Madden type) or college FAs?
this isn't simply a "Greedy owner not willing to spend to the cap" issue.
edit: well now that you mention it there were many jokes thrown Lats way but it's nothing Montreal didn't joke about either. Or his teammates. Who knows--Lats is a funny guy. Maybe he mocked Russo once in front of everyone and hurt his feelings? I still didn't really pick up on any maliciousness but it could have been there. I have less regard for Russo than most people but he doesn't strike me as that kind of guy with players still on the team he's covering.
Running a real hockey team isn't like running an ea hockey team. Real teams are less likely to be willing to just throw away an extra mil to a player they don't think deserve it. Major contract disputes erupt over less in fact.
and the reported thin-ice Lats was on with his conditioning from the year before...there could be more to this than we know. Maybe he wasn't strictly obeying the rehabbing program they laid out for him during this injury?
Just because I don't think it's in our best interest to sign him doesn't mean I'm not puzzled that we wouldn't. If that makes any sense. Didn't he have a quote a while back that made it sound like he himself doubted very much if he'd be back here next year?
and the reported thin-ice Lats was on with his conditioning from the year before...there could be more to this than we know. Maybe he wasn't strictly obeying the rehabbing program they laid out for him during this injury?
Just because I don't think it's in our best interest to sign him doesn't mean I'm not puzzled that we wouldn't. If that makes any sense. Didn't he have a quote a while back that made it sound like he himself doubted very much if he'd be back here next year?
I thought he had one that made it sound like he would. After Brodziak's extension maybe?
Now Latendresse talks like he believes his career in Minnesota will end after this season. After all, it would be difficult for the Wild to tender the restricted-free-agent-to-be a qualifying offer of $2.5 million after two injury-plagued seasons.
"I was starting to feel the way I felt three years ago, so at least I'm leaving on a good note," Latendresse said. "I know I can be productive in the league, I know I can bring something good to a team, but I think I just want to be part of the team here. I like the team here. I like the place.
Latendresse feeling powerless
lol it was more Russo's words than anything quoted by Lats that gave me the impression.
