Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist
I think you're way off base here. Most of us understand where we are with the players we have. Signing Brouwer because we can't get a star is a silly reason to sign him.
The training some of us dislike the signing is exactly what we're saying. There's no ulterior motives here
The amount of a finite amount of cap space allocated to this player is not commensurate with the value he'll bring
Is not that we're afraid of truculence, it's not because we don't understand hockey, and it's not because we think he's a terrible player.
|
OK, let's break it down for a second.
$73 million cap
Brouwer's $4.5 M hit accounts for 6.2% of the cap space.
Roster consists of 14 forwards, 7 d-men, and 2 goalies: 23 players.
That means the average amount of money per player is $3.17 M. But not everyone can make that.
OK, so you give your top line players $6-8 million and sacrifice your 4th line/3rd pairing players to around the league minimum or a little more.
Starting goalie $5-6 million, backup around $1 million.
One would argue that your 2nd and 3rd line players are relatively interchangeable these days, so you would have them making anywhere between $2-6 million depending on what they bring and their role, leaving a little extra for your top forwards and defensemen.
If you didn't have Brouwer as an UFA signing, what would be fair value for a 20 goal/40 point forward, who brings a lot more than just points to the team? Maybe $4 million/year? Ok, so you tack on an extra 500K for him being a free agent. There's your contract.
Plus, as someone mentioned earlier, we were just paying David Jones that amount of money, and there were moments he wasn't even an effective 3rd liner, never mind potential 2nd liner with intangibles that make other players better.
I think as we move on this year, people are going to realize that this is not a poor-value contract. It's pretty much market value.