Allan Muir likes us… he really, really does!
First of all, if you haven’t yet heard…the Thrashers avoided a salary arbitration hearing by signing forward Ben Eager to a one-year $965,000 deal. C-Viv has all the particulars here.
But I bring you even more good news. Yes…it seems as though the Thrashers have gained some accolades from a member of the press, one who is not a resident of Thrasherville.
Uh-huh…Allan Muir of SI.com has posted a list of the eight teams he feels have improved the most so far this summer. Counting down Muir’s most improved list… No. 8 Calgary Flames, No. 7 Dallas Stars, No. 6 Boston Bruins, No. 5 St. Louis Blues, No. 4 Toronto Maple Leafs, No. 3 Vancouver Canucks, No. 2 Tampa Bay Lightning…and the number 1 most improved team this offseason according one Mr. Allan Muir…
Yourrrrrrrrrrrr Atlantaaaaaaaa THRA-shers!
In his recent entry, Muir explains his reasons for placing Atlanta on top of his “Most Improved” list by saying…
“Gone, finally, is dithering GM Don Waddell, replaced by Rick Dudley, a manager who clearly understands that today’s teams need a little steak to go with the sizzle. Example? After seeing the Cup-winning ‘Hawks flattened by a salary cap semi, Dudley flew in like a crow to pick the meat of Chicago’s exposed bones. And while no one should mistake his acquisitions for Jonathan Toews or Patrick Kane, he added significant talent along with that winning attitude in Dustin Byfuglien, Andrew Ladd, Brent Sopel and Ben Eager, along with assistant coach John Torchetti. He made a savvy move by signing free agent Chris Mason, a reliable netminder who can handle the mail as often, or as little, as necessary to expedite the development of Ondrej Pavelec. He also quietly tabbed Boston assistant Craig Ramsay to take over behind the bench, ensuring that an offensively aggressive, physically accountable style will become the hallmark of this club moving forward.
These Thrashers may not boast the wattage of previous editions, but it’ll be a more consistent and more competitive group. A playoff berth is within reach.”
Nice. But Allan…don’t go jinxin’ us by tossing the “P” word around here prematurely, m-kay?
Do you agree with Alan Muir’s assessment that the Thrashers have improved enough to be a playoff contender?
- Yes! Playoffs here we come (45%, 65 Votes)
- No! We are no closer to the playoffs (10%, 14 Votes)
- Dude, don't use the "P" word prematurely! (45%, 66 Votes)
Total Voters: 145
Loading ...Personally, I will say that I agree with the assessment in general. I’ve gone on record as saying the Mason signing was a very positive step in the right direction and that the trades for the Chicago-Four were great acquisitions…and bringing in Ramsay as well as Torch was nothing short of a minor coup as well.
But I’d shy away from declaring the work of Dudley and Co. as big of a success as Muir has here…simply because I’d like to see the final product of their efforts first.
Still to be determined is what it’ll take to get Andrew Ladd’s signature on a contract…if Dudley can get Maxim Afinogenov to re-sign here…if not, who might he get to fill that void…if the Thrashers can acquire an adequate replacement for Pavel Kubina…who we might see as a goalie coach/consultant hired…can Arturs Kulda and/or Patrice Cormier crack this lineup…can Cormier stay out of jail…you get the picture.
Regardless, it’s always nice to read some positive things about the Thrashers than what we’ve become accustomed to over their first decade of play.
Hmmm…would Allan call that the Dithering Don Decade?
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
106 comments Add your comment
Michael
July 29th, 2010
11:45 am
Ladd signs for 1 year according to ESPN.com
World Be Free
July 29th, 2010
12:08 pm
schroeder-thank you
Joe Friday
July 29th, 2010
12:18 pm
“the same guy suddenly gets a lot more ice time on our team that he got on his previous team and becomes a 30 goal scorer and you can talk extension during the season up to March”
We wanted the guys, that’s why we went out and got them, you make a commitment and give the club stability, something this club really really needs. If one of them goes and pots 30, here come the offer sheets and there goes the player elsewhere. You lock them up now.
“by the same token if say Ladd or Eager turn out to be a stiff then you don’t have the long term contract to have to deal with.”
Ladd has 2 Cups on his resume and you think he’s going to be a stiff? Eager’s a 4th line banger and proven his worth. Why would they go trade for them if they’re worried they’re going to be stiffs?
Nice argument, but it doesn’t add up to reality. This club needs stability, and the one year signings are very, very disappointing.
Smoothie
July 29th, 2010
12:22 pm
“Nice argument, but it doesn’t add up to reality. This club needs stability, and the one year signings are very, very disappointing.”
Bingo, bango, BOFFO!!
Joe Friday for blogger of the week!! Oh wait, you’ve already had your turn!
Y’all are really reaching in some of these justification arguments.
Let’s hope an extension is in the offing this fall when the pressure of arbitration hearings is in the rear-view mirror, hopefully not a cracked RV mirror now that Duds is in charge.
Red Light
July 29th, 2010
12:22 pm
Ladd gets a $700,000 raise from last year. Slater got a $60,000 raise, Eager got the same amount, Pavelec got $150,000 more on salary but probably a lot less in bonus money, Mason signs for $1.4 million less, and some idiot arbiter gives MacArthur $1 million more? Where’s the equity in this system?
ben
July 29th, 2010
12:42 pm
Unless Kovy was covering up a lot of talent, or Mason is very very good, this is no playoff team. We won’t have anywhere near the goals for, but give up fewer goals against. The question is, will that be enough. I think not. However, this team does have a more solid footing than last year. It’s being run by legit hockey people, and that’s not nothing. Kari isn’t here, and his replacement is GOOD. We’ve got scoring in the prospect ranks. Face it, the Thrashers have started over. It’s a new day in Blueland. I knew it would come, but I just thought it would be because DW died or retired. This team is sticking around these parts. We’re one of the top ten metro areas in northern North America. Will hockey ever be as popular as the Braves? Nope. Not unless something changes, but at least for now, a positive change in the front office has been made. And for this Thrasher fan, right now, that’s enough.
Midfield
July 29th, 2010
12:42 pm
Perhaps, Eager will take home more now that he relocated to GA. About “Your Father was a hamster” part – is it a new chant you’re proposing, Schroeder?
rob
July 29th, 2010
12:42 pm
the signings have to be a plus……they signed. If they didnt want to be here, they would have gone to arbitration, plain and simple. This culture surrounding this team took a decade to build. It wont change overnight even with the magic wand that brought us Duds, Ramsey, and Torch. They are proven. They have a good core of young guys. This season should see HOCKEY being played at Philips arena. HOCKEY players are going to want to see their hard work rewarded…..by some screaming fans. The 1 year contracts may well be a combination of Duds not wanting to over commit, and the players not wanting to do the same.
I think Little could be telling. Not because he is a shining star, but because he has gone through this system. Does he see the end of last season as a new beginning here and the revival of hockey bringing fans back to Philips to cheer and support our team? I am surprised there hasn’t been too much of a push to get better ticket deals to get some fans back and new ones involved yet. I haven’t gotten a plan yet, waiting to see if they come up with a good one or if I should just pick and choose what I want to go see.
schroeder
July 29th, 2010
12:50 pm
Joe Friday, I think your definition of stability and a guarantee for sucess is a little too close together. By no means am I saying that either of them is a stiff, I was using them as merely an example. What I am saying is that this whole exercise of signing long term or even middle term contracts is an inexact science and these short term contracts give us FLEXABILITY. I for one know that this reputation for losing UFA players did not form overnight and will not change over the course of one summer. That being said I would hope that the reputation of Dudley,Torch and Ramsey would give any potential UFA a better feeling for this Organ-I-zation and this trend will change. The journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. THAT is REALITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
schroeder
July 29th, 2010
12:57 pm
I for one would not like to be the one making these decisions in regards to contract length and dollars spent and have to read all the second guessing from us bloggers,suffice it to say that I am thrilled to see the changes and pray that they are correct. I would like to see MAX signed though. And yes I would propose that considering the past 10 years of bumbling by the former GM that he has probably on many occasions told someone “I TOLD EM WE ALREADY GOT ONE!!”
schroeder
July 29th, 2010
1:06 pm
Trixie, help me I have one trapped at about 12:45
R. Stroz
July 29th, 2010
1:11 pm
When Holik and Charmin were signed, both were in their 30s, the RFAs are in their mid to lower 20s.
BIG DIFFERENCE.
I’ll say it again. RETENTION of top tier talent is the concern. One year contracts by 20 somethings doesn’t bode well for anyone’s faith in the Thrashers long term.
Lets put it this way…Who is the next added to the list Brunnette, Staios, Savard, Hossa, Kovy…
The Thrashers have NEVER kept their top tier talent once they have reached UFA status. So, no a one year contract extension doesn’t exactly make me feel warm and fuzzy.
One year contracts are a vote of no confidence, plain and simple.
Smoothie
July 29th, 2010
1:13 pm
I just don’t understand this way of doing business. Ladd has only 2 years before he can sign wherever he wants. No one would be asking him to forgo anything in a 2 year deal as he will be stuck with us next year unless he decides to be a huge pain in the arse and ruin the locker room with his poor attitude (unlikely).
But playing this 1-yr, wait-and-see game is insulting to the player whom you ostensibly really wanted in the first place. Why would he feel any desire to sign a LT deal last year after getting treated this way before even playing a game in ATL? While some of the Thrashers poor reputation has been exacerbated by the media, this is why they have it to begin with.
No matter what Ladd is good for your team. He probably hasn’t reached his full potential yet and he’s a great character guy in the room. He’s very well-spoken, seemingly quite intelligent and alternate capt worthy in a longer-term situation.
This moves smacks of nothing but short-sighted and niggardly parsimony.
Yes, I’m feeling quite feisty and SAT-y.
Smoothie
July 29th, 2010
1:15 pm
Wow, this is such a racially touchy city that the online paper’s word filter thinks N – I – G – G – A – R – D – L – Y is a racial epithet?
Brendan
July 29th, 2010
1:16 pm
BG33Brown, there’s definitely some anomalies in there that prove the rule. Last year was a bit “freakish” in the East. There’s not really any debate there. Most years, it takes 93 to 94 points to get in. Instead, clubs at 88 and 89 points got in. And negative goal differentials, too. And to cap it all off, BG33Brown, what were the seeds that qualified for the Conference Finals? 1st and 2nd? 2nd and 4th? 4th and 6th? Nope, the answer is 7th and 8th. That’s a freakishly unusual situation. Can we count on that being present again this year? I don’t know. I’d just like us to be a consistently good team all year, make the playoffs, and take a series to six games.
schroeder
July 29th, 2010
1:28 pm
As far as reaching for justifications, I am not trying to justify anything, I am meerly making observations based on what other teams are doing,and considering what has been done by this team in the past,I choose to think that maybe this is how it should have been done all along. Again, going back to the definition of insanity.I have never been a GM in the NHL and don’t propose to start today,so I will defer to someone who has done it at a high level as Dudley has done in the past. It may not be the way you would have done it,but your paycheck is not signed by the ASG and his is. MORE REALITY!!!!!!!!!!
Trixie (Rawhide's Secretary)
July 29th, 2010
1:28 pm
Mr. schroeder & Mr. Smoothie – There really is no rhyme or reason to what gets caught in Blog Purgatory and why. But give me enough time and I will set them free.
Fly little comment posts…be free….
Smoothie
July 29th, 2010
1:44 pm
Thanks Trixie! Much appreciated.
I appreciate the fact that so many folks here are trying to remain positive w/r/t the Thrashers and new leadership under Duds. I too am very optimistic about our young team and look forward to proving naysayers wrong.
However, the one-year deal for Ladd is completely senseless. Even if we “over-paid” a bit by giving him 2 years and say $5.2 M, you would still have flexibility in your cap and it would do nothing but engender goodwill. Plus it would signal to other potential FA’s that we’re not screwing around — that we’re serious about turning this thing around and making hockey viable in the capital of the South.
schroeder
July 29th, 2010
1:48 pm
I would like say one more thing on this and I will STFU. I was not and I venture to say that no one on this blog was present during the negotiations between our RFA’s or our arb elig players. So we have no way of knowing what the terms of the discussions were. The only contracts that I have heard discussed of any length are those in regards to a certain Russian figure skater.Between the rumblings I have been hearing in regards to the cap coming down next year and the lack of any longer terms being signed by any other UFA’s regardless of their age, I believe that there is going to be a lot of wait-and-see 1 yr contracts. I still have a warm and fuzzy about this year. I have not heard of any claims on collusion by the owners to amont to anything,but,I assume we will not be the only club having to go through this next summer. So……… “GO AWAY OR I WILL TAUNT YOU A SECOND TIME!!!!”
schroeder
July 29th, 2010
1:49 pm
BTW, Thanks Trixie, I will dance at your next wedding!!
DWTOO
July 29th, 2010
2:05 pm
I fart in your general direction.
The good news is we now have a respected GM. We probably have a team capable of reaching the playoffs. Our lineup is tougher than ever.
But, I am concerned that we continue to sign one year contracts and can’t keep players in the fold when their contracts run out. Guess I’m just going to have to IDWT along with WBF.
At least we’ll see some better hockey this year. No more forgetting about the first two periods and then playing frantically in the third.
Smoothie – probably the filter doesn’t recognize multiple sylable(sp) words. If you read the comments on the political blogs you’ll understand that this is the intellectual pinnacle of newsppaper readers.
kracker
July 29th, 2010
2:08 pm
The blog today is unbelieveable. People form the most rock hard opinions (and that’s all they are) based on rather flimsy information…No, even that’s wrong, none of these opinions are based on objective information, just imagined bits and pieces that get weaved into this majestic tapestry of doom. LOL It really boggles one’s mind.
But it makes for entertaining reading.
Joe Friday
July 29th, 2010
2:10 pm
schroeder and Smooth, re. the negotiations, didn’t Dudley say he wanted to sign Ladd to a long term contract? I thought I had read that shortly after the trade. Even if he didn’t publicly say it, it’s a no brainer. Ladd’s going to get more ice time here, his scoring is going to go up over what he potted in Chicago behind Toews, Kaner, Hossa et al
It is not rocket science to figure out that his scoring is going to go up, and that subsequently the arbitration award next summer is going to go up. If MacArthur was awarded his contract, look out at what Ladd will get if he pots 25 for us. That’s why you lock him up now, and I’m certain that Wadudley tried. The bad news is they didn’t get it done, for whatever reason (and my guess is the player didn’t want to sign past one year).
Consider this if you have any questions re. Ladd. We gave up two solid assets for him. He has won 2 Stanley Cups. He played the Finals last year for the Hawks with a broken shoulder and torn ligaments. The kids a hockey player, and he opted for a 1 year contract for us. That is disappointing.
World Be Free
July 29th, 2010
2:23 pm
kracker, DWTOO-agree with both of you.
I am not losing my mind over today’s events at all. If a player is worthy of a long term deal because of their performance in Atlanta, they will get it.
We need to borrow Mr. Peabody’s Way-Back Machine and go back 1 year ago to realize that we are better off today than we were in July 2009. I want long term deals too and maybe they will come. But these deals are not an entitlement, they have to be earned.
Smoothie
July 29th, 2010
2:28 pm
kracker – while it may be “flimsy” information, it doesn’t take much more than logic to realize that Ladd should be paid commensurate with Mason Raymond at the very least and probably more than Matt Moulson. The problem with not getting the 2nd year done is the potentially damaging residual effect (see Colby Armstrong defection) in the wake of playing this wait-and-see game.
It really makes no sense for Ladd to only want a 1-year deal. Where the heck is he gonna go next summer? Russia for a year? He is not likely to get an offer sheet and he has to wait another year for UFA. Chances are we chose to give him a one year deal. Perhaps it was with a very strong caveat — and a Rick Dudley handshake — that he will get paid at least that sum next summer if a LT deal can’t be worked out during the season.
But that’s not the point. We are headed for another lockout in 2 years and GM’s are certainly loath to hand out any LT deals no matter who the player is unless they are an upper tier talent with a proven record over 5 years or more. But a 2 year commitment is hardly what I would call akin to a financial risk when half your team is either a UFA or RFA next summer. Obviously the management has leverage on the RFA’s but it doesn’t engender any goodwill for the long-term.
How do you expect to change the culture if you don’t start doing business not only differently, but THE RIGHT WAY!
That is all. Back to new marketing campaigns and ze-donkey mascot talk.
Joe Friday
July 29th, 2010
2:33 pm
“But these deals are not an entitlement, they have to be earned.”
Are you saying Ladd hasn’t shown his worth and has not earned more than a 1 year contract from the Atlanta Thrashers? Really?
He won a Cup in Carolina. He won a Cup this past year in Chicago, including playing the Finals with a broken shoulder and torn ligaments. Potted 17 regular season goals for the Stanley Cup champs playing on their checking line against the other team’s top lines, he’s 25 years old, and he hasn’t “earned” more than a 1 year contract from the Thrashers? Really?
Adam
July 29th, 2010
2:37 pm
schroeder, we’re not talking about signing UFA’s to multiple year deal here.
What we are talking about is locking up quality RFA’s beyond RFA status and hopefully more than 1 year into their UFA status. There have been quite a few RFA’s given more than 1yr deals this off season…
Red Light
July 29th, 2010
2:43 pm
Here’s some more flimsy information!
Dudley has said character is important to him, and then talked at length about the type of person/player Ladd is. No, he’s not going to score 30 goals, but he’s 25, has two Cups, can forecheck and bang, and the GM likes him. I think there is little question that Dudley wanted to lock him up for at least three to four years. Instead, he got him signed for one. Translation: Ladd wants to see how it goes this year before signing long term with this team. Or, his agent was more than happy to get his client a $700,000 raise, and hopes that with additional ice time and responsibility here in Atlanta, his production numbers will go up, and thus lead to another substantial raise next year.
I believe time will prove that Ladd is the most consistent and offers a better long-term solution than any of the others acquired from Chicago.
Dudley was asked about the type of player Andrew Ladd is and his potential upside in Atlanta
Dudley: “What everybody likes about Laddie is his ability to do all things. He can score. He can check. He can play physical and he’s probably as hard a worker as you will find. The coaching staff in Chicago always talked about his habits, and how his habits rubbed off on the team. He does everything at 150 percent. He doesn’t take a shift [off], he doesn’t take a practice [off] or a drill [off], he does it as hard as he can do it. And, it does rub off on teammates. They watch a guy who has won two Stanley Cups in two different places and they watch him compete like he does even in practice and it has a tendency to bring the tempo of the team up, and that’s very important.”
Dudley was asked if Ladd was the 15- to 20-goal scorer that he mentioned recently in other media conversations during the past week.
Dudley: “I think Andrew Ladd is that guy. We think he can score 20 goals and think he can do a whole lot of other things. There are players that score 30 or 40 goals in hockey, and they are certain type of goals. If Andrew Ladd gets 20 goals, they are really good goals because he does so many other things along with it. We think he is that guy. Does that mean we would entertain thoughts of another player? No. But when we talked about a 15- to 20-goal scorer, Andrew Ladd is that perfect guy. He’s such a complete and competitive player. That’s exactly what we were looking for and were lucky enough to get it.”
kracker
July 29th, 2010
3:05 pm
BenThrashers If I’m not mistaken teams have 48 hours after their arbitration cases have been settled to make buyouts. Thrashers are finished with arb.
Does this apply to White?? (Not that I think they will.)
Tom Lysiak
July 29th, 2010
3:05 pm
Just waiting for Sage and some of the other “positive thinkers” to come state the obvious here. The one-year deals are because they know the team is being sold and moved to Winnipeg next year. There, it’s been said.
kracker
July 29th, 2010
3:11 pm
Guys – I’m just laughing at “The sky is falling” routine because an RFA hasn’t signed yet. He signs. Great! Wait, oh no “The sky is still falling” because he signed for one year.
All this stuff is supposed to be fun, is how I look at it.
World Be Free
July 29th, 2010
3:13 pm
Joe and others-these 1 year deals are not desired, nor are they the end of the world. If I cheered the trades, which I did, then I want the guys to stay long term. Very few players are getting long term deals this year, so let the process work iteself out.
Back to work.
Smoothie
July 29th, 2010
3:24 pm
Thanks Red Light.
Pretty much tells you all you need to know.
If Ladd’s agent wants to keep his options open, then he is being very, very optimistic about Ladd’s potential for a break-out year and a potential offer sheet or LT offer from the Thrashers. His price-tag has been set by the market. Don’t see how a 2 year deal would really hamstring his ability to get a LT offer in FA in the summer of 2012.
If Ladd does what he did in Chicago for 2 years in ATL, and pots a few extra goals because he gets some PP time and / or additional minutes on the 2nd line, then he should have no problem convincing another GM to pay him Colby Armstrong money for 3 years or more. In 2013, the Leafs will be wishing they had traded for Ladd over Versteeg and they hadn’t signed Army to a 3 year deal.
glovesave29
July 29th, 2010
3:44 pm
RL – exactly. Let’s hope for a great start, get the barn rocking again with big crowds and make this the place to be. Then Duds and the agents can sit down during the AS break and hammer out some longer term deals. I am sure Rick wanted longer deals in the first place, but the players are feeling the situation out. Can’t blame them…
Tom – Sage (oh, the irony) is the master of the obvious. He is here just for laughs. Just like ol’ Stendec after a loss.
Alan R.
July 29th, 2010
3:45 pm
via Twitter:
@CraigCustance Thrashers and Ladd were both interested in long-term deal but couldn’t come to agreement on his value during UFA years.
That takes care of that. Moving right along…
kracker
July 29th, 2010
3:47 pm
CraigCustance Thrashers and Ladd were both interested in long-term deal but couldn’t come to agreement on his value during UFA years.
OK, this proves, again proves, the Thrashers are [fill in the blank].
Or might it also say something about Ladd and/or his agent? Just asking.
GaVaHokie
July 29th, 2010
3:47 pm
Per Craig Custance twitter… “Thrashers and Ladd were both interested in long-term deal but couldn’t come to agreement on his value during UFA years.”
Yep, sounds exactly like Armstrong, but at least we have another RFA year after this one. We only got one RFA year with Army.
Smoothie
July 29th, 2010
4:00 pm
Well, that’s good to know that both parties want a long-term deal, but still doesn’t explain the 1-yr as opposed to 2. Oh well, guess neither party felt it was that important considering the mutual interest in a long-term relationship. But I would think an agent is doing his client potential harm by not getting the guarantee of a 2nd year.
Good luck Laddy! Hope you love it here, play great and don’t get hurt.
kracker
July 29th, 2010
4:02 pm
Ah, can’t wait to hear from Stendec. If he doesn’t change to the Stars blog.
Alan R.
July 29th, 2010
4:07 pm
but still doesn’t explain the 1-yr as opposed to 2.
He’s RFA next year. If neither side could agree on his value into his UFA years, then it’s safe to say the team wants to see how he performs now, and re-visit the prospects of a long-term deal after the new year
Just a guess, mind you. I still don’t understand this ire towards the one year deals. All it takes is a bit of rational thinking
rob
July 29th, 2010
4:07 pm
you all have been beat down by the octotards and dumbwad for far too long. give it time before saying it is business as usual. you may be pleasantly surprised, and if not, you can always say i knew it! LOL
Smoothie
July 29th, 2010
4:17 pm
“Just a guess, mind you. I still don’t understand this ire towards the one year deals. All it takes is a bit of rational thinking”
With all due respect, I am using rational thought and logic in forming my arguments. I understand the affinity for 1-year deals on the part of GM’s especially with economic uncertainty, salary cap pressures and the threat of a lockout looming. But from a player’s standpoint, it seems like it would be in the best interest of a client who is 25 and bumping up against his ceiling in terms of potential to leverage Dudley’s comments and get a 2nd year. Why take the risk of blowing out your knee and winding up in the AHL in 2011 when you have no contract?
Logic and reason works on both sides of an argument, not just the one you like better.
Rawhide
July 29th, 2010
4:21 pm
Per C-Viv tweet…”Thrashers have agreed to terms with goaltender Peter Mannino. Details to follow”
Smoothie
July 29th, 2010
4:22 pm
Craigy Custance tweets again: Also told that Max Afinogenov is still on the radar for the Thrashers although it didn’t sound like negotiations were real active.
Midfield
July 29th, 2010
4:23 pm
Dudley may have lost it and called Ladd dumb as a sack of hammers, for all we know.
Alan R.
July 29th, 2010
4:26 pm
Smoothie, the argument against the deals just appear irrational to me. Then again, I did read JF’s rambling rant first about it, so I think that pretty much set the tone for me.
“…and that was our Conspiracy segment. Stay tuned for local news, weather, and sports in the second half of the hour.”
Smoothie
July 29th, 2010
4:45 pm
Alan – I don’t know about that. A difference in perception? I hardly think Joe Friday was being irrational or rambling. I thought he made lucid, well-reasoned points about why this 1-yr deal wasn’t good. Now it may not be as fact-based as you would like, but that doesn’t mean good logic or reason wasn’t used. If you disagree with his POV, perhaps your reason just led you to a different conclusion. But the part that makes no logical sense to me is Ladd wanting a LT deal, but not “settling” for a 2-year deal. To me, and I would think to a lot of people, playing with a 1-year deal (when you had leverage to begin with) seems very risky. Not as risky for the Thrashers certainly.
Flagstaff
July 29th, 2010
5:00 pm
Being completely random (now with 100% less politics), I am getting a crazy feeling that the Flames are going to bomb out next year. I honestly think that the Oilers are in better shape than they are, and that their receiving Muir’s honors as the 8th most-improved team are bunk. Olli Jokinen? Really?
Or, maybe I’m completely off base here. Dunno.
Alan R.
July 29th, 2010
5:14 pm
But the part that makes no logical sense to me is Ladd wanting a LT deal, but not “settling” for a 2-year deal.
I think this is primarily where we differ.
The one year deal is like both sides saying “we’ll determine his value after he plays a year.” It honestly makes perfect sense to me. If it didn’t make sense to Ladd, he wouldn’t have signed. Yes, the team could have signed him to a two year deal, but then risk losing him as a UFA in 2012.
Furthermore, the CBA is set to be re-negotiated in 2012. If this Kovalchuk stand-off is any indicator, it could be a pretty intense battle by both sides to get what they want, and may even result in the season being shortened. I’m not looking forward to the CBA negotiations.
R. Stroz
July 29th, 2010
6:00 pm
All this just seems like deja vu all over again.