The Good, the Bad, and the Matt Carle

[tuckrr]

Originally Posted by dawkins121

Have the Flyers seemingly shrinking chances of signing Suter (Lidstrom's retirement, rumors of Suter wanting to stay West, rumors of Jagr re-signing, etc.) affected anyone's opinion on whether they want to re-sign Carle or not?

I still absolutely want to take a run at Suter. But if he asks for more than 7.5 or has no interest in joining the flyers, we pretty much need to retain Carle if we want to stay competitive.

[Beef Invictus]

Originally Posted by tuckrr

I still absolutely want to take a run at Suter. But if he asks for more than 7.5 or has no interest in joining the flyers, we pretty much need to retain Carle if we want to stay competitive.

The salary cap was 50 million when we signed Timonen at 6.3 mil, which was 12 percent of our available cap space. If the cap goes up to 73 million as some predict (It is 73, right?) and we sign Suter for 7.5, that alone would be 10 percent of our salary cap...equivalently less than Timonen got. We could probably offer him a little over that if we really need to/Homer decides it's worth it. Homer likes spending extravagantly, so he might decide to do that.

As far as past precedent goes it wouldn't be shocking if we were to sign him for 7.5-8 million. It would certainly make our cap situation more interesting than it already is. Could that cost us Voracek, Simmonds, or both down the road? Others? I don't know, and it's vodka martini time so I'm going to stop with this math crap before I hurt myself. I'll let others ponder that.

[VanSciver]

Originally Posted by Fish Invictus

The salary cap was 50 million when we signed Timonen at 6.3 mil, which was 12 percent of our available cap space. If the cap goes up to 73 million as some predict (It is 73, right?) and we sign Suter for 7.5, that alone would be 10 percent of our salary cap...equivalently less than Timonen got. We could probably offer him a little over that if we really need to/Homer decides it's worth it. Homer likes spending extravagantly, so he might decide to do that.

As far as past precedent goes it wouldn't be shocking if we were to sign him for 7.5-8 million. It would certainly make our cap situation more interesting than it already is. Could that cost us Voracek, Simmonds, or both down the road? Others? I don't know, and it's vodka martini time so I'm going to stop with this math crap before I hurt myself. I'll let others ponder that.

It was a different situation then with the Cap. The Flyers weren't tight to the Cap and had plenty of space.

[Beef Invictus]

Originally Posted by VanSciver

It was a different situation then with the Cap. The Flyers weren't tight to the Cap and had plenty of space.

Yeah, that's the big sticking point now. We don't have the flexibility we had...Detroit does.

[tuckrr]

Originally Posted by Fish Invictus

Yeah, that's the big sticking point now. We don't have the flexibility we had...Detroit does.

I'm all for spending..but I'd rather wait to blow our load on Weber...Do we really want to have suter for 7-8 years at 7.5mil? (maybe...but its so freaking risky)
edit: and I'd really rather not lose voracek.


Homer's also gotten a lot better at making the cap-hit manageable through long term contracts (see: Pronger, Richards, Carter...albeit richie/carter weren't UFAs. But you get the Idea)

I think if Suter wants to win, 6.5 mil over 9 years should be what he takes. Look at kovalchuks contract