pilldoc Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 and to make matters worse we have Read buried in the AHL at 2.6 million Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 17 minutes ago, pilldoc said: YES ..we are ...... I could care less who we're still paying not to play. Neither one is hurting the team right now. I'm more concerned about who we're paying to play that WILL hurt the team (MacDonald, Wiese, Lehtera) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 17 minutes ago, pilldoc said: and to make matters worse we have Read buried in the AHL at 2.6 million Who cares? What's the effect on the team? What does it matter? I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone cares. He's in the minors because better players came along and they fit under the cap. I'd be more upset if he stayed on the team just because he's a vet and they're paying him (Mac, Manning, Weise, Lehtera) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 44 minutes ago, brelic said: The same way you don't name a captain and then trade him (Forsberg, Richards, Lindros) or let him walk (Jason Smith)? The "A" has no direct bearing on whether or not they think MacDonald is "good." No, they think he's good. Would you play him on your top pairing and on your PP if you didn't think he was good? Would you keep him in the NHL two years after you burried him in the AHL for 900k of cap room when you have clearly better players ready to go if they didn't think he was good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pilldoc Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 4 minutes ago, King Knut said: Who cares? What's the effect on the team True there is no "direct" effect on the team, however, ..... the indirect effect is that you are paying out $4.1 million to players who no longer are contributing to this team and this money could be well spent else where ..... that is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 5 minutes ago, pilldoc said: True there is no "direct" effect on the team, however, ..... the indirect effect is that you are paying out $4.1 million to players who no longer are contributing to this team and this money could be well spent else where ..... that is all. Normally I'd agree with you, but this team is now at the point when it can populate itself with better players without having to pay more than the cap will allow them. The better players are all in the system. What bugs me is that for the first time in 5 years, this team can finally literally afford to replace over paid players on bad never ending contracts with better players on better contracts, and they are instead choosing to continue playing the crap players. Sometimes you have to play MacDonald or Weise because that's what you can ice or because Homer made a bad contract that's preventing you from singing someone better. They no longer do though. They are playing inferior players because for some reason they want to. I don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FD19372 Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 1 minute ago, King Knut said: Normally I'd agree with you, but this team is now at the point when it can populate itself with better players without having to pay more than the cap will allow them. The better players are all in the system. What bugs me is that for the first time in 5 years, this team can finally literally afford to replace over paid players on bad never ending contracts with better players on better contracts, and they are instead choosing to continue playing the crap players. Sometimes you have to play MacDonald or Weise because that's what you can ice or because Homer made a bad contract that's preventing you from singing someone better. They no longer do though. They are playing inferior players because for some reason they want to. I don't get it. I'm with you on this. I think it's this fear of putting too much responsibility on rookie players before they're able to handle it - which I think is a bunch of nonsense. These youngsters will learn nothing from playing less on the big club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pilldoc Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 7 minutes ago, King Knut said: Normally I'd agree with you, but this team is now at the point when it can populate itself with better players without having to pay more than the cap will allow them. The better players are all in the system. What bugs me is that for the first time in 5 years, this team can finally literally afford to replace over paid players on bad never ending contracts with better players on better contracts, and they are instead choosing to continue playing the crap players. Sometimes you have to play MacDonald or Weise because that's what you can ice or because Homer made a bad contract that's preventing you from singing someone better. They no longer do though. They are playing inferior players because for some reason they want to. I don't get it. totally agree ..... hard to argue against anything here. you are preaching to the choir. I was just making comment on how we are paying players that in essence no longer help this team..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JR Ewing Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 4 hours ago, fanaticV3.0 said: Well that's a relief, because clearly players are never wrong… Yes, because that is absolutely what I was saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 6 hours ago, ruxpin said: I wonder. Is it possible there's more to him than ANY of us are seeing? What if this does increase whatever value at a trade deadline deal? I'm telling you, if we come away with a first round pick or top 6 winger... If that happens I will literally drive to whatever team's front offices and punch that GM in the gut on behalf of his fans. ... and no, no team is in danger of being under the cap floor, so no Pronger to the Coyotes type deals make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 5 minutes ago, King Knut said: If that happens I will literally drive to whatever team's front offices and punch that GM in the gut on behalf of his fans. I'll pay for the gas. And the bail. I don't see it, either. I don't get this whole thing at all. But obviously the Flyers' management is either inexplicably high on him or they're doing their damnedest to make other teams think they are. If it's the former, I'm just wondering if "hockey people" in general see more than this board--myself included--do. Or if we should have the team offices tested for carbon monoxide or radon or something. If it's the latter (make other teams think they are) and they can get something fairly decent for him at the deadline or something, then I guess I'm okay. No way they ever get a first. But even if the used vacuum no longer sucks...well, it'd be the only thing in the trade that doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 6 minutes ago, ruxpin said: or they're doing their damnedest to make other teams think they are. It's a diabolical strategy to be sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 7 minutes ago, Podein25 said: It's a diabolical strategy to be sure The diabolicalist. Yugely diabolical. The most diabolical ever. Trust me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanaticV3.0 Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 20 hours ago, brelic said: The same way you don't name a captain and then trade him (Forsberg, Richards, Lindros) or let him walk (Jason Smith)? The "A" has no direct bearing on whether or not they think MacDonald is "good." I forgot that he existed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 3 hours ago, fanaticV3.0 said: I forgot that he existed. Same. It's not that I disliked him, necessarily. I mean, he was okay while he was here, but only okay. It's just that if you asked me to list former Flyer players--or even just Flyer captains--it would be a long wait until I thought of Jason Smith, if I remembered him at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 11 minutes ago, ruxpin said: Same. It's not that I disliked him, necessarily. I mean, he was okay while he was here, but only okay. It's just that if you asked me to list former Flyer players--or even just Flyer captains--it would be a long wait until I thought of Jason Smith, if I remembered him at all. Fun fact of the day - after this season, Giroux will be tied for the second longest-serving captain in Flyers history, with Lindros (6 seasons). Clarke is first with 9 seasons. So it's quite possible that Giroux surpasses him if he finishes his contract here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanaticV3.0 Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 19 hours ago, ruxpin said: Same. It's not that I disliked him, necessarily. I mean, he was okay while he was here, but only okay. It's just that if you asked me to list former Flyer players--or even just Flyer captains--it would be a long wait until I thought of Jason Smith, if I remembered him at all. I thought that I liked him, but I honestly can't remember. I don't remember him being here just one season and thought that he was a fan favorite. Now I just think I have a confused with someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.