Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe
Not that I disagree with what you are saying, but I think the people who are worried about the ELC stuff is probably due to the Chicago thing - players coming off their ELCs and having big pay-days, and Chicago having to dismantle a large part of their team. People are hoping that by letting Monahan's ELC slide a year, it will give the Flames a bit more money to build a competing team at that time.
Having Monahan at 3.75 vs having him at 6 (or whatever) is an extra 2.25 that can be used in the 'hopefully contending year' on something else for the roster.
Personally, I don't think that extra bit makes too much of a difference. You have to pay your stars - they do the heavy-lifting. If he is a star, pay him. Hopefully he (and others) sign 'friendly contracts'. You are not going to get them to sign friendly long-term contracts if they feel the organization has been unfair to them - like sending them back down to juniors just to save a year on the ELC.
Baertschi and Monahan will be the only two players of note that you can maybe expect big 2nd contracts for thus far. Saving a year really doesn't matter. Flames have yet to draft their other stars (more likely), with Gaudreau as a possibility as well. Jankowski, Poirier, Klimchuk and whomever else are at least another year after down the road (and if they also make it), plus whomever they draft in the next couple of drafts. Having Monahan kick in this year or next will make no notable difference - he is simply too early in the rebuild to worry about and try to 'save' a year on.
|
To add to this, assumming Monahan works out, the Flames will be looking to extend Monahan beyong his ELC point with a long term deal in the 6+ mil range. It'll be similar to what Edmonton has done. Burning a year of ELC is pretty meaningless in that situation.