Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Poehling come playoff time?
#1
Matthias Brunet, a reporter for "La Presse", looked into the contractual implications as well as the expansion draft implication of playing Poehling in Montreal this season.

After a lot of back and forth with the league, it was determined that Poehling would lose a year off of his ELC if he played only one game, regular season or playoff with the Habs this year, which, not unlike with Lindgren, is seen as an avenue to take to get the College Student to sign with MON.

However, the good news is that the burnt year, if Poehling plays no more than 10 games, would not affect his status at the expansion draft. He would not need to be protected.

So, there is a way to get Poehling to sign more easily without risking to expose him at the expansion draft. Playoffs start April 6th in the NHL and playoffs for the frozen four can end as late as April 13th.

Burning that year off Poehling's ELC, considering his team is one of the favourites to make the frozen four, might well hinge on the Habs making the playoffs.
Ancient Chinese Proverb: A mosquito landing on your testicle should help you realize that violence doesn't solve every problem
Reply
Thanks given by:
#2
Getting Ryan Poehling's John Hancock on a contract while he's still in college would be no mean trick. Easily worth burning a year of his ELC.
---
"Obviously, probably, you know, scoring probably helps." - Carey Price
Reply
Thanks given by:
#3
Not worth it at all. A year off his elc is not worth whatever marginal contributions he could make in the playoffs
Reply
Thanks given by:
#4
(2019-02-13, 09:59 PM)mada7 Wrote: Not worth it at all. A year off his elc is not worth whatever marginal contributions he could make in the playoffs

What if that year is the difference between signing him and keeping him, or having him walk and create his own market?
Reply
Thanks given by: FormalWare , FormalWare , Leb7
#5
(2019-02-13, 10:02 PM)RightNyder Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 09:59 PM)mada7 Wrote: Not worth it at all. A year off his elc is not worth whatever marginal contributions he could make in the playoffs

What if that year is the difference between signing him and keeping him, or having him walk and create his own market?

That seems like an unlikely scenario to occur. We just need to sign him. Playing him in the playoffs and losing an ELC year is absolutely not worth doing
Reply
Thanks given by:
#6
(2019-02-13, 10:17 PM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:02 PM)RightNyder Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 09:59 PM)mada7 Wrote: Not worth it at all. A year off his elc is not worth whatever marginal contributions he could make in the playoffs

What if that year is the difference between signing him and keeping him, or having him walk and create his own market?

That seems like an unlikely scenario to occur. We just need to sign him. Playing him in the playoffs and losing an ELC year is absolutely not worth doing

it seems like a very l likely scenario to me.
 23 more years.
Reply
Thanks given by: FormalWare , Leb7
#7
(2019-02-13, 10:17 PM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:02 PM)RightNyder Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 09:59 PM)mada7 Wrote: Not worth it at all. A year off his elc is not worth whatever marginal contributions he could make in the playoffs

What if that year is the difference between signing him and keeping him, or having him walk and create his own market?

That seems like an unlikely scenario to occur. We just need to sign him. Playing him in the playoffs and losing an ELC year is absolutely not worth doing

Unlikely?  It is the norm to entice players to sign as the college players have more negotiating power than CHL players.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/03/sport...t-nhl.html

Article on this from last year.
Reply
Thanks given by: FormalWare , Leb7 , Leb7
#8
(2019-02-13, 10:26 PM)bchippie Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:17 PM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:02 PM)RightNyder Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 09:59 PM)mada7 Wrote: Not worth it at all. A year off his elc is not worth whatever marginal contributions he could make in the playoffs

What if that year is the difference between signing him and keeping him, or having him walk and create his own market?

That seems like an unlikely scenario to occur. We just need to sign him. Playing him in the playoffs and losing an ELC year is absolutely not worth doing

it seems like a very l likely scenario to me.

Seriously? You practically worship the ground Bergevin barely avoids tripping over while he walks and chews gum but don't think he could sign a guy without giving him playing time in the playoffs?

I put the odds of him getting to free agency as pretty low and avoiding that scenario does not require him playing in the playoffs.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#9
(2019-02-13, 11:50 PM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:26 PM)bchippie Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:17 PM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:02 PM)RightNyder Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 09:59 PM)mada7 Wrote: Not worth it at all. A year off his elc is not worth whatever marginal contributions he could make in the playoffs

What if that year is the difference between signing him and keeping him, or having him walk and create his own market?

That seems like an unlikely scenario to occur. We just need to sign him. Playing him in the playoffs and losing an ELC year is absolutely not worth doing

it seems like a very l likely scenario to me.

Seriously? You practically worship the ground Bergevin barely avoids tripping over while he walks and chews gum but don't think he could sign a guy without giving him playing time in the playoffs?

I put the odds of him getting to free agency as pretty low and avoiding that scenario does not require him playing in the playoffs.

They are just talking about him playing a game of hockey, the same as Lindgren and many others.
Reply
Thanks given by: bchippie
#10
(2019-02-14, 12:40 AM)tm123 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 11:50 PM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:26 PM)bchippie Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:17 PM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:02 PM)RightNyder Wrote: What if that year is the difference between signing him and keeping him, or having him walk and create his own market?

That seems like an unlikely scenario to occur. We just need to sign him. Playing him in the playoffs and losing an ELC year is absolutely not worth doing

it seems like a very l likely scenario to me.

Seriously? You practically worship the ground Bergevin barely avoids tripping over while he walks and chews gum but don't think he could sign a guy without giving him playing time in the playoffs?

I put the odds of him getting to free agency as pretty low and avoiding that scenario does not require him playing in the playoffs.

They are just talking about him playing a game of hockey, the same as Lindgren and many others.
Don't worry. Latest topic to fight to the death against for mada7. It won't have to make sense. He just needs to be right.

Glad to see you're back, mada7. Was concerned about you. FYI, as pointed out, it's become the norm, with quality College players, at least, to burn an ELC year off in order to get them to sign.

You do realize, I hope, that the difference in waiting a year, for Poehling, and getting a chance to play one last time for a championship with his brothers, maybe, is complete autonomy. He would get to choose for which team he will play for, perhaps for the rest of his life. There might well be situations where he could step in as a 3rd line C and have a chance to win a Cup right off the top, plus see the depth at C ahead of him retire as he is ready to assume duties higher up in the lineup? PITT is always looking for a 3rd line C as they near the playoffs, for example. Malkin only has 3 years left on his contract and will be 35/36 at the end of it. Crosby is good for 6 years and will 37/38 at the end of his current contract. 

Or, maybe he does it to play for his hometown team right from the start, instead of waiting for UFA status like Tavares did?

Burning a year off the ELC is very enticing for the players as they have one less year to play for a pittance (controlled cost near 1M at the most as a bee salary). Waiting a year before playing in the NHL, but deciding where you will play, won't make much of a difference in your earnings at the end of your career. Of course, for that to happen and work out for you, you have to be good and sought after by other teams. You can't pull that off while being just a run-of-the-mill player.
Ancient Chinese Proverb: A mosquito landing on your testicle should help you realize that violence doesn't solve every problem
Reply
Thanks given by:
#11
(2019-02-14, 10:29 AM)Scriptor Wrote:
(2019-02-14, 12:40 AM)tm123 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 11:50 PM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:26 PM)bchippie Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:17 PM)mada7 Wrote: That seems like an unlikely scenario to occur. We just need to sign him. Playing him in the playoffs and losing an ELC year is absolutely not worth doing

it seems like a very l likely scenario to me.

Seriously? You practically worship the ground Bergevin barely avoids tripping over while he walks and chews gum but don't think he could sign a guy without giving him playing time in the playoffs?

I put the odds of him getting to free agency as pretty low and avoiding that scenario does not require him playing in the playoffs.

They are just talking about him playing a game of hockey, the same as Lindgren and many others.
Don't worry. Latest topic to fight to the death against for mada7. It won't have to make sense. He just needs to be right.

Glad to see you're back, mada7. Was concerned about you. FYI, as pointed out, it's become the norm, with quality College players, at least, to burn an ELC year off in order to get them to sign.

You do realize, I hope, that the difference in waiting a year, for Poehling, and getting a chance to play one last time for a championship with his brothers, maybe, is complete autonomy. He would get to choose for which team he will play for, perhaps for the rest of his life. There might well be situations where he could step in as a 3rd line C and have a chance to win a Cup right off the top, plus see the depth at C ahead of him retire as he is ready to assume duties higher up in the lineup? PITT is always looking for a 3rd line C as they near the playoffs, for example. Malkin only has 3 years left on his contract and will be 35/36 at the end of it. Crosby is good for 6 years and will 37/38 at the end of his current contract. 

Or, maybe he does it to play for his hometown team right from the start, instead of waiting for UFA status like Tavares did?

Burning a year off the ELC is very enticing for the players as they have one less year to play for a pittance (controlled cost near 1M at the most as a bee salary). Waiting a year before playing in the NHL, but deciding where you will play, won't make much of a difference in your earnings at the end of your career. Of course, for that to happen and work out for you, you have to be good and sought after by other teams. You can't pull that off while being just a run-of-the-mill player.

Without injuries, Poehling won't have a spot.
Evans signed without games played, but with much online concern about him opting to become a UFA.

I can't recall if Poehly has another year of College eligibility remaining, but if he does, he may be wise to stay there... AHL is fine, too, but either way, those goal totals are scaring me right now.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#12
(2019-02-14, 10:34 AM)Guy Smiley Wrote:
(2019-02-14, 10:29 AM)Scriptor Wrote:
(2019-02-14, 12:40 AM)tm123 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 11:50 PM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:26 PM)bchippie Wrote: it seems like a very l likely scenario to me.

Seriously? You practically worship the ground Bergevin barely avoids tripping over while he walks and chews gum but don't think he could sign a guy without giving him playing time in the playoffs?

I put the odds of him getting to free agency as pretty low and avoiding that scenario does not require him playing in the playoffs.

They are just talking about him playing a game of hockey, the same as Lindgren and many others.
Don't worry. Latest topic to fight to the death against for mada7. It won't have to make sense. He just needs to be right.

Glad to see you're back, mada7. Was concerned about you. FYI, as pointed out, it's become the norm, with quality College players, at least, to burn an ELC year off in order to get them to sign.

You do realize, I hope, that the difference in waiting a year, for Poehling, and getting a chance to play one last time for a championship with his brothers, maybe, is complete autonomy. He would get to choose for which team he will play for, perhaps for the rest of his life. There might well be situations where he could step in as a 3rd line C and have a chance to win a Cup right off the top, plus see the depth at C ahead of him retire as he is ready to assume duties higher up in the lineup? PITT is always looking for a 3rd line C as they near the playoffs, for example. Malkin only has 3 years left on his contract and will be 35/36 at the end of it. Crosby is good for 6 years and will 37/38 at the end of his current contract. 

Or, maybe he does it to play for his hometown team right from the start, instead of waiting for UFA status like Tavares did?

Burning a year off the ELC is very enticing for the players as they have one less year to play for a pittance (controlled cost near 1M at the most as a bee salary). Waiting a year before playing in the NHL, but deciding where you will play, won't make much of a difference in your earnings at the end of your career. Of course, for that to happen and work out for you, you have to be good and sought after by other teams. You can't pull that off while being just a run-of-the-mill player.

Without injuries, Poehling won't have a spot.
Evans signed without games played, but with much online concern about him opting to become a UFA.

I can't recall if Poehly has another year of College eligibility remaining, but if he does, he may be wise to stay there... AHL is fine, too, but either way, those goal totals are scaring me right now.
Poehling can opt to finish his degree and choose is team in the NHL after. If not having a spot open is a concern for him, he ought to choose his own team with another year of experience and maturity behind him when he joins the NHL.
Ancient Chinese Proverb: A mosquito landing on your testicle should help you realize that violence doesn't solve every problem
Reply
Thanks given by:
#13
(2019-02-14, 10:29 AM)Scriptor Wrote:
(2019-02-14, 12:40 AM)tm123 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 11:50 PM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:26 PM)bchippie Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:17 PM)mada7 Wrote: That seems like an unlikely scenario to occur. We just need to sign him. Playing him in the playoffs and losing an ELC year is absolutely not worth doing

it seems like a very l likely scenario to me.

Seriously? You practically worship the ground Bergevin barely avoids tripping over while he walks and chews gum but don't think he could sign a guy without giving him playing time in the playoffs?

I put the odds of him getting to free agency as pretty low and avoiding that scenario does not require him playing in the playoffs.

They are just talking about him playing a game of hockey, the same as Lindgren and many others.
Don't worry. Latest topic to fight to the death against for mada7. It won't have to make sense. He just needs to be right.

Glad to see you're back, mada7. Was concerned about you. FYI, as pointed out, it's become the norm, with quality College players, at least, to burn an ELC year off in order to get them to sign.

You do realize, I hope, that the difference in waiting a year, for Poehling, and getting a chance to play one last time for a championship with his brothers, maybe, is complete autonomy. He would get to choose for which team he will play for, perhaps for the rest of his life. There might well be situations where he could step in as a 3rd line C and have a chance to win a Cup right off the top, plus see the depth at C ahead of him retire as he is ready to assume duties higher up in the lineup? PITT is always looking for a 3rd line C as they near the playoffs, for example. Malkin only has 3 years left on his contract and will be 35/36 at the end of it. Crosby is good for 6 years and will 37/38 at the end of his current contract. 

Or, maybe he does it to play for his hometown team right from the start, instead of waiting for UFA status like Tavares did?

Burning a year off the ELC is very enticing for the players as they have one less year to play for a pittance (controlled cost near 1M at the most as a bee salary). Waiting a year before playing in the NHL, but deciding where you will play, won't make much of a difference in your earnings at the end of your career. Of course, for that to happen and work out for you, you have to be good and sought after by other teams. You can't pull that off while being just a run-of-the-mill player.

I am not saying wait until next year to sign him. Sign him this year once he can be signed by all means. I think that is a good idea and better to lock him up now than to let him get to the point where he may become a UFA. If he is insistent upon burning a year off his ELC Id do that but be immediately on the lookout to move him as that's a sign he's not interested in playing here long term and his value might never be higher than it is now coming off a strong year in college and at the world juniors. If his value is indeed high enough that he can make this kind of demand then we should be looking to get as much value as possible for him before he bolts.

I get why it is enticing to the players but ELCs are super important nowadays in order to contend for a cup and burning a year off one for anything less than a bonafide superstar is a bad cap move on a team that can ill afford many more of them. We've already burned off one year of Kotkaniemi's ELC in a year where we aren't likely to accomplish much of anything beyond making the playoffs that burning a year off another of our better prospects ELCs on another year where we are unlikely to accomplish much of anything should be avoided if at all possible.

Also you need to get over this crush you seem to have on me. Im happily married to someone who isn't addicted to the spinning motion of hamster wheels

Also I find it rich that the man who thinks a 50 goal fourth line and a team having 11 guys with at least 20 goals is even remotely possible has the nerve to say anyone else's ideas don't make sense.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#14
An important consideration is that players signing out of college are generally older and more 'coached up' (spend more time at practice and play fewer games) than players signing ELC to go to the AHL (or NHL) from Junior. That is not really the case with Poehling, because he started college so young, but he can still benefit from the precedence.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#15
(2019-02-14, 11:15 AM)on2ndthought Wrote: An important consideration is that players signing out of college are generally older and more 'coached up' (spend more time at practice and play fewer games) than players signing ELC to go to the AHL (or NHL) from Junior. That is not really the case with Poehling, because he started college so young, but he can still benefit from the precedence.

He benefits but ELC years are absolutely vital for a team hoping to contend. ELCs are the best place to get the extra bang for your buck you need to get over the hump and the longer you can milk those the better off the team is in the long term as it keeps your window open longer. It's better than losing him for nothing next year but ideally we should be aiming to sign him but not play him this year so we can get the most value from the ELC. If burning the ELC year is an absolute must for him then that tells me his priority isn't playing here so we should sign him, burn that year but be looking to move him asap while his value is at its highest
Reply
Thanks given by:
#16
(2019-02-14, 11:23 AM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-14, 11:15 AM)on2ndthought Wrote: An important consideration is that players signing out of college are generally older and more 'coached up' (spend more time at practice and play fewer games) than players signing ELC to go to the AHL (or NHL) from Junior. That is not really the case with Poehling, because he started college so young, but he can still benefit from the precedence.

He benefits but ELC years are absolutely vital for a team hoping to contend. ELCs are the best place to get the extra bang for your buck you need to get over the hump and the longer you can milk those the better off the team is in the long term as it keeps your window open longer. It's better than losing him for nothing next year but ideally we should be aiming to sign him but not play him this year so we can get the most value from the ELC. If burning the ELC year is an absolute must for him then that tells me his priority isn't playing here so we should sign him, burn that year but be looking to move him asap while his value is at its highest
There's a leap of logic that has no traction. Burning a year off his ELC has no bearing on Poeling's long term aims to stay here or not. It's good business, period.

IMO, burning a year off KK's contract was worth it in terms of development for the player. 

You have to stop looking at hockey as a strict numbers game.
Ancient Chinese Proverb: A mosquito landing on your testicle should help you realize that violence doesn't solve every problem
Reply
Thanks given by:
#17
(2019-02-14, 10:55 AM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-14, 10:29 AM)Scriptor Wrote:
(2019-02-14, 12:40 AM)tm123 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 11:50 PM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-13, 10:26 PM)bchippie Wrote: it seems like a very l likely scenario to me.

Seriously? You practically worship the ground Bergevin barely avoids tripping over while he walks and chews gum but don't think he could sign a guy without giving him playing time in the playoffs?

I put the odds of him getting to free agency as pretty low and avoiding that scenario does not require him playing in the playoffs.

They are just talking about him playing a game of hockey, the same as Lindgren and many others.
Don't worry. Latest topic to fight to the death against for mada7. It won't have to make sense. He just needs to be right.

Glad to see you're back, mada7. Was concerned about you. FYI, as pointed out, it's become the norm, with quality College players, at least, to burn an ELC year off in order to get them to sign.

You do realize, I hope, that the difference in waiting a year, for Poehling, and getting a chance to play one last time for a championship with his brothers, maybe, is complete autonomy. He would get to choose for which team he will play for, perhaps for the rest of his life. There might well be situations where he could step in as a 3rd line C and have a chance to win a Cup right off the top, plus see the depth at C ahead of him retire as he is ready to assume duties higher up in the lineup? PITT is always looking for a 3rd line C as they near the playoffs, for example. Malkin only has 3 years left on his contract and will be 35/36 at the end of it. Crosby is good for 6 years and will 37/38 at the end of his current contract. 

Or, maybe he does it to play for his hometown team right from the start, instead of waiting for UFA status like Tavares did?

Burning a year off the ELC is very enticing for the players as they have one less year to play for a pittance (controlled cost near 1M at the most as a bee salary). Waiting a year before playing in the NHL, but deciding where you will play, won't make much of a difference in your earnings at the end of your career. Of course, for that to happen and work out for you, you have to be good and sought after by other teams. You can't pull that off while being just a run-of-the-mill player.

I am not saying wait until next year to sign him. Sign him this year once he can be signed by all means. I think that is a good idea and better to lock him up now than to let him get to the point where he may become a UFA. If he is insistent upon burning a year off his ELC Id do that but be immediately on the lookout to move him as that's a sign he's not interested in playing here long term and his value might never be higher than it is now coming off a strong year in college and at the world juniors. If his value is indeed high enough that he can make this kind of demand then we should be looking to get as much value as possible for him before he bolts.

I get why it is enticing to the players but ELCs are super important nowadays in order to contend for a cup and burning a year off one for anything less than a bonafide superstar is a bad cap move on a team that can ill afford many more of them. We've already burned off one year of Kotkaniemi's ELC in a year where we aren't likely to accomplish much of anything beyond making the playoffs that burning a year off another of our better prospects ELCs on another year where we are unlikely to accomplish much of anything should be avoided if at all possible.

Also you need to get over this crush you seem to have on me. Im happily married to someone who isn't addicted to the spinning motion of hamster wheels
Glad to see you were able to win ONE argument. Happy
Ancient Chinese Proverb: A mosquito landing on your testicle should help you realize that violence doesn't solve every problem
Reply
Thanks given by:
#18
(2019-02-14, 11:23 AM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-14, 11:15 AM)on2ndthought Wrote: An important consideration is that players signing out of college are generally older and more 'coached up' (spend more time at practice and play fewer games) than players signing ELC to go to the AHL (or NHL) from Junior. That is not really the case with Poehling, because he started college so young, but he can still benefit from the precedence.

He benefits but ELC years are absolutely vital for a team hoping to contend. ELCs are the best place to get the extra bang for your buck you need to get over the hump and the longer you can milk those the better off the team is in the long term as it keeps your window open longer. It's better than losing him for nothing next year but ideally we should be aiming to sign him but not play him this year so we can get the most value from the ELC. If burning the ELC year is an absolute must for him then that tells me his priority isn't playing here so we should sign him, burn that year but be looking to move him asap while his value is at its highest

And yet, the situation being described here is exactly what occurred with Jonny Gaudreau and the Calgary Flames. Gadreau finished four years of NCAA, signed his contract the day after the Frozen Four ended, played one game in the NHL that season (2013-14) thereby burning his first ELC year. By your logic, the Flames should have traded JG yet he has signed away 2 years of his UFA status at a team friendly rate.
None of us know who Ryan Poehling is or what he cares about. Claiming that any one action "tells me his priority isn't..." is more likely the speaker projecting their personality into the discussion.
Reply
Thanks given by: bchippie , bchippie
#19
People....Poehling does not need to be bribed to sign with us. U tell me which 1st round draft pick from NCAA has not signed with their team? Lindgren was a UFA, its those NCAA players that u try and bribe to sign with u with these little extra offers.

Poehling is signing with Habs when he feels he is done with school. If Mtl choses to call him up to be on the team come playoffs, it will be cause he is needed not cause they fear he wont sign. If anything, they wont need him (remember we just improved our 4th line) but he may come just to be a "black ace" and get to see and experience playoff hockey in the NHL.

I see him signing and not playong in the playoffs for Mtl. Especially if his team goes far in the playoffs.
Reply
Thanks given by: mada7 , mada7
#20
(2019-02-14, 11:49 AM)Scriptor Wrote:
(2019-02-14, 11:23 AM)mada7 Wrote:
(2019-02-14, 11:15 AM)on2ndthought Wrote: An important consideration is that players signing out of college are generally older and more 'coached up' (spend more time at practice and play fewer games) than players signing ELC to go to the AHL (or NHL) from Junior. That is not really the case with Poehling, because he started college so young, but he can still benefit from the precedence.

He benefits but ELC years are absolutely vital for a team hoping to contend. ELCs are the best place to get the extra bang for your buck you need to get over the hump and the longer you can milk those the better off the team is in the long term as it keeps your window open longer. It's better than losing him for nothing next year but ideally we should be aiming to sign him but not play him this year so we can get the most value from the ELC. If burning the ELC year is an absolute must for him then that tells me his priority isn't playing here so we should sign him, burn that year but be looking to move him asap while his value is at its highest
There's a leap of logic that has no traction. Burning a year off his ELC has no bearing on Poeling's long term aims to stay here or not. It's good business, period.

IMO, burning a year off KK's contract was worth it in terms of development for the player. 

You have to stop looking at hockey as a strict numbers game.

If it's something he insists upon and without it he will test his options next year then yes it is reasonable to assume he won't be here long. Given Bergevin's willingness to play hardball with anyone not named Price Id like to think he can drive a hard enough bargain to not have to give up the extra ELC year. The only real benefit I see to the team in doing this is if the alternative is losing him for nothing next year. 

I do believe that KK would've developed just as well playing big minutes as a first liner with loads of PP time in Finland as he does playing 3rd line minutes with some PP time here with the added benefit of not burning a year on his ELC. The numbers and asset management are an important part to building a long term contender and the current worth/state of the present team should make that decision even easier.
Reply
Thanks given by:


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)