EmployeeoftheMonth Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 $20M for Sundin, Hodgson (known) for Kassian (uknown), a King's ransom of youth for Keith Ballard, and a 6-year deal to a guy who's had one good NHL season might disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 So you suggest that we sign another 10 year contract for another player while we are still figuring out a way to trade Lu and his long contract? Although Erhoff's cap hit is $4mil / year he is signed 10 years... 10 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 So you're going to argue that Hodgson is a known commodity and trading him was a mistake while in the same breath say it was a mistake to sign a guy who in your opinion only had one good NHL season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 That'd only be on a cash basis, which is not relevant. Cap hit is all that matters as it relates to building a contender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Hodgson was the 10th overall pick, the CHL Player of the Year, the Hockey News' Top Prospect, won all kinds of accolades as voted by the OHL coaches, was the top point-getter at the '09 WJC's, and I believe he was our team's 2nd or 3rd leading goal scorer at the time of being traded. In the context of a year where we could win a Cup, trading him for Zack Kassian, who watched us be eliminated by LA while eating a hotdog in the press box, was not a wise move. Garrison was undrafted, got a spot on Florida because they stunk, and he was cheap, and then had a breakout season when Brian Campbell arrived. Totally different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeBossy Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Lu's contract isn't the problem. The problem is that he controls where he ends up. Because of that, we have very little leverage. 10 years isn't ideal, no, but give me Ehrhoff @ $4M per year for 10 years over Garrison @ $4.6M for 6 years, any day of the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Cash is relevant as it determines the cap hit. It still comes down to my question: Is Ehrhoff worth more than either Sedin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Ask Daige how much junior accolades mean. Ask Burrows how much not getting drafted means. Life doesn't come with guarantees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Have to disagree here - Ehrhoff over Garrison? Sorry but I'll take the 6'2 218lb defenceman who had 127 hits at $4.6 mil over the 6'2 203lb defenceman who when he played a full season here had 54 hits any day of the week. Problem with the Canuck defence is we have to many defencemen who play the run and gun style like Ehrhoff and not enough physical D - its my biggest knock against Edler - he needs to use his size more often - maybe go to the Ulf Samuelson summer hockey school and learn to get nasty :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Hodgson was the 10th overall pick, the CHL Player of the Year, the Hockey News' Top Prospect, won all kinds of accolades as voted by the OHL coaches, was the top point-getter at the '09 WJC's, and I believe he was our team's 2nd or 3rd leading goal scorer at the time of being traded. In the context of a year where we could win a Cup, trading him for Zack Kassian, who watched us be eliminated by LA while eating a hotdog in the press box, was not a wise move. Garrison was undrafted, got a spot on Florida because they stunk, and he was cheap, and then had a breakout season when Brian Campbell arrived. Totally different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Oh, OK, so you're using the two exceptions to the rules as basis to your argument. Odds need to be weighed. The vast majorty of 1st overall picks don't end up like Daigle, much like the vast majority of undrafted ECHLers don't end up like Burrows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 In any case and as per usual you're wrong and contradicting yourself to fit your argument. Hodgson had only proven himself over one year...at that one could make an argument that really he only proved himself for a little over a month. Making an argument that Hodgson is known and Garrison has only proven himself for 1 season is silly. Really you just never had much of an idea who Garrison was before he was signed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 LOL @ "only" He was the second-leading goal-scorer on our team, at 21 years old and playing very sparsely. In addition, it's not "silly", because Cody Hodgson wasn't signed to a 6-year, $4.6M deal, like Garrison. NOT COMPARABLE. And you're right, I didn't have much of an idea as to who Garrison is when he signed, because his career has been largely irrelevant! Answer me this - do you like Calgary's signing of Wideman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 What on earth could Wideman possibly have to do with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 A lot. This place was laughing at Calgary incessantly at signing that contract, even though Wideman's career has been far more productive. And yes, he's older - a whole year. That's it. So if you think that Garrison is such a great signing, I'm just hoping that you think that Wideman was, as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 No pal you won't be asking me anything. Even if you last that long on here you still haven't pointed out anything that suggests Garrison will all of a sudden flop. See that's the difference between our arguments. You are certain of what's going to happen but you point to nothing to back up your "opinions". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Here let me fix this for you man so maybe it's a little more clear. I'm not "certain" of anything, though I do believe strongly that the signing will not work out. Anyway, this debate tires me, we've been through it far too often. Here's the gist: You see the signing as another shrewd maneuver by the GM who can do no wrong, and since Garrison's improved in each of his 3 years in the NHL (2.5, really), continued improvement is what we should expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Would you have liked to have signed Shultz for as much as Edmonton did with the promises they made to him in regards to ice time. Also why is the window shut in two years? Do we not get to replace players as they get older or do we simply have to play with this roster forever and ever? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Total cash determines the cap hit, over the life of the contract. Ehrhoff's cap hit is $4.0M, which is less than Sedin's of $6.1M. A contract being front-loaded by nature is meaningless except that it's more valuable to Ehrhoff (and nobody else) by way of having more of the cash up front. Cap hit is all that anybody should care about. Some guys just fit well in certain places, and Ehrhoff was one of those guys here. Basically from the moment he played his first game, he was an obvious fit. And fine, don't give him a 10-year deal. Would $5M per year over 8 years really be all that damaging? Oh no, he'd be paid more than Kevin Bieksa; who cares? He's a better player and deserves it. Look at the numbers that he put up with us. Not a lot of 50-point defencemen around the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 As for replacing players, in 2 years, Danny & Hank will be 34. Their offense will be nearly impossible to replace. Trading Cody certainly doesn't help with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.