cprice12 wrote:ecbm wrote:So: $4M (actually maybe $3M depending on who you believe) is too much for Sobotka in a league where Dave Bolland will get $27.5M over five seasons and Benoit Pouliot will get $20M over 5 seasons.
Giving $2.6M for Ott for multiple years maybe isn't an overpay in a league where you can get Jay McClement on a one-year deal for $1M. For the record, I have no tolerance for underperformers who excuse themselves by claiming injury after the fact. If you're healthy enough to play, you're healthy enough to have expectations placed on you. By the way, everyone enjoying Army's (Hitch's too I imagine) abiding fascination with aging ex-Stars who sit the bench for 45-50 minutes every game and guarantee younger players not getting a look because of their veteran status and relatively large contracts? /rant
As for "maybe the moves aren't related" - Armstrong suggested it himself.
The whole KHL thing rings like hollow rhetoric a la "we don't negotiate with terrorists." In any business you need to be aware of the possibility of your personnel being poached by competitors from anywhere. Again, NHL salary structure itself suggests Boat wasn't asking too much especially after the Blues enjoyed his services at below-market rate for a couple seasons and gave comparable (more?) money to an inferior player in Berglund.
I am a betting man and I'd bet a significant amount right now that Sobotka never plays in the NHL again. He's from Europe and has a lucrative contract in a country with significantly lower taxes that takes him through his age 30 season. Not all European hockey players are as enamored of the NHL as North Americans tend to think.cprice12 wrote:Ott can go two different ways...he can rebound a bit from a down year, or he can continue to decline.
Can you not see how the fact that their reckoning of Sobotka was done with so very different criteria might be maddening to some? You don't think Berglund and Ott are overpaid? Pro sports is very much a "what-are-you-doing-for-me-right-now kind of business. I'll take the opportunity to point out that Armstrong has brought this club exactly as many Stanley Cups as any other GM and fewer playoff series wins than several. Just sayin'...
Dave Bolland's contract was laughed at by everyone because it was a ridiculous price to pay for him.
I'm not going to say Sobotka is worth more simply because someone decided to pay Dave Bolland over $5 million per. Dave Bolland isn't worth that much...so using it as leverage for a Sobotka contract or in an argument as a reason why Armstrong should have paid Sobotka more is disingenuous.
With that said... I feel Berglund is overpaid now. (I said that before...you must have missed it) But Army apparently disagrees, otherwise he wouldn't have signed him to that contract.
Ott being overpaid is debatable. If he rebounds a bit, he'll be worth the money.
Let's put this whole thing into perspective...
People are upset Sobotka is gone and we have Ott instead. This is a 3rd line dilema. It's not a 1st line crisis. Yes, Sobotka will be missed. But it's not like we lost Tarasenko and resigned Roy as his replacement.
We're still significantly better than we were last year.
Couldn't agree more with bolded. I would much rather have Sobotka than Ott. But, it's not like we're suddenly not Cup contenders because of this. It's a small wound. It's also worth noting that our perception is colored a bit by Sobotka having the best year of his career and Ott having the worst. The 2014-15 gap between the two could very easily be much smaller than the 2013-14 gap.