JJFIVEOH Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 Its a deal that was made to help Florida out to reach the cap floor. They will need a couple contracts like this to help them reach the minimum Glad somebody finally recognized this. According to Campbell other Hawks want to come to FL to be with Tallon. If picking up somebody like Campbell is a favor............... I'd sure love to see who they have in mind to return the favor.
bunomatic Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 Man, you are like a kid holding his breath. No matter how many times you say it, Stafford's contract is a good deal and as the cap continues upward, Pominville's is getting closer to good value. It is funny how these deals get closer to good value the closer they get to the end of the term.
deluca67 Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 Its a deal that was made to help Florida out to reach the cap floor. They will need a couple contracts like this to help them reach the minimum They could have picked up some one year deals to get that done. To commit that much money to a player like Campbell is ridiculous. It was when Chicago did it and even worse that a second team would make that same mistake.
deluca67 Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 It is funny how these deals get closer to good value the closer they get to the end of the term. The Connolly extension looks great now because it wasn't three years.
JJFIVEOH Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 They could have picked up some one year deals to get that done. To commit that much money to a player like Campbell is ridiculous. It was when Chicago did it and even worse that a second team would make that same mistake. Yeah, one year deals.............. that's the key to a rebuilding team. :unsure: Guess you don't realize that by the time FL has to resign their young players and their prospects to new contracts, Campbell's will be done. His contract will never be a factor to their cap hit.
deluca67 Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 Yeah, one year deals.............. that's the key to a rebuilding team. :unsure: You don't rebuild with a grossly overpaid defenseman like Campbell.
nucci Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 Eklund? Actually, just a writer for the paper. Not so much a rumor as saying they may. Sorry I was a bit misleading.
JJFIVEOH Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 You don't rebuild with a grossly overpaid defenseman like Campbell. When you're $24 mil UNDER the minimum cap, what difference does it make?At least Tallon knows he's bringing in a player who WANTS to play for the team and be part of a rebuild.
deluca67 Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 When you're $24 mil UNDER the minimum cap, what difference does it make? Being under the cap by so much doesn't excuse bad hockey decisions. That's like TW trying to excuse the Pominville contract by pointing out that the Cap ceiling went up. A bad contract is a bad contract no matter how much the Cap goes up.
nobody Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 When you're $24 mil UNDER the minimum cap, what difference does it make?At least Tallon knows he's bringing in a player who WANTS to play for the team and be part of a rebuild. Not to mention that Campbell is a pretty decent offensive defenseman. Not his fault he is overpaid.
JJFIVEOH Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 Being under the cap by so much doesn't excuse bad hockey decisions. That's like TW trying to excuse the Pominville contract by pointing out that the Cap ceiling went up. A bad contract is a bad contract no matter how much the Cap goes up. Poor comparison because BFLO's payroll is more than double FL's. And like nobody pointed out, they're getting a hell of a defensemen in return.
deluca67 Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 Not to mention that Campbell is a pretty decent offensive defenseman. Not his fault he is overpaid. $7.15 mil and he finished third among blueliners on his team in scoring and 52nd in the league. It's not his fault that he is overpaid, it is the GM's fault for picking up that contract.
tom webster Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 Being under the cap by so much doesn't excuse bad hockey decisions. That's like TW trying to excuse the Pominville contract by pointing out that the Cap ceiling went up. A bad contract is a bad contract no matter how much the Cap goes up. I thought JP's contract was high when they did it but it was close to the going rate at the time for a defensively sound 30 goal scorer. The market has since adjusted itself and teams are only paying their top 3 or 4 forwards and top 2 defenseman over $5. Like it or not, Pominville is a 5 th or 6th forward on almost any team in the league.
tom webster Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 $7.15 mil and he finished third among blueliners on his team in scoring and 52nd in the league. It's not his fault that he is overpaid, it is the GM's fault for picking up that contract. It's funny how you now omit his plus/minus because it no longer serves your argument. We know how much you love +/-. By the way, what was the Norris' winners +/- this year.
JJFIVEOH Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 $7.15 mil and he finished third among blueliners on his team in scoring and 52nd in the league. It's not his fault that he is overpaid, it is the GM's fault for picking up that contract. And yet he still averages more PPG as a defensemen than the winger Chicago got in return.
deluca67 Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 It's funny how you now omit his plus/minus because it no longer serves your argument. We know how much you love +/-. By the way, what was the Norris' winners +/- this year. You should read the post I responded to. Even with the +/- he isn't worth the money. At that type of money you need to get a franchise changing player in return. Campbell is nowhere that player.
deluca67 Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 And yet he still averages more PPG as a defensemen than the winger Chicago got in return. Is the extra $25 million in salary worth that difference?
will Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 wasn't tallon the GM who originally signed campbell at that ridiculous rate (reason for getting replaced)?
JJFIVEOH Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 Is the extra $25 million in salary worth that difference? When compared to Olesz/$3 mil a year? ABSOLUTELY!
BuffaloSoldier2010 Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 You don't rebuild with a grossly overpaid defenseman like Campbell. The panthers do.
deluca67 Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 wasn't tallon the GM who originally signed campbell at that ridiculous rate (reason for getting replaced)? He was, which is part of the reason I think he did the favor for the Hawks.
tom webster Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 He was, which is part of the reason I think he did the favor for the Hawks. While we both agree that Campbell isn't worth the money, I see him as at the least a very good second pairing guy who plays the power play and can eat minutes. If you need to spend $9 million dollars, would you rather have that plus 2 hot prospects or hungry veterans playing for around a million each or three stiffs like Olesz eating up $3 million each?
JJFIVEOH Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 I wonder how many current or ex-Blackhawks will follow. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/florida-panthers/fl-florida-panthers-trade-0626-20110625,0,2448632.story
deluca67 Posted June 26, 2011 Report Posted June 26, 2011 While we both agree that Campbell isn't worth the money, I see him as at the least a very good second pairing guy who plays the power play and can eat minutes. If you need to spend $9 million dollars, would you rather have that plus 2 hot prospects or hungry veterans playing for around a million each or three stiffs like Olesz eating up $3 million each? There are better ways to spend that money. If Campbell only had a year or two left on the contract it would be a different story. He has five years left.
deluca67 Posted June 26, 2011 Report Posted June 26, 2011 Not much has been said about the Sharks picking up Burns. 26 years old. 6' 5" 220lb. 17 goals 46 points a -10. 133 hits/106 blocked shots 1 year left at $3.35, pending UFA The Sharks paid a heavy price for him. The Sabres got good value in the Regehr trade. Can the Sharks say the same?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.