People like to say that the rookies have to be better to 'earn a spot', and that's great and all, but the statement sort of ignores key facts that complicate the decision making process.
For one, contracts have a big role in who stays or goes. One or two way contracts, or even just the notion that you could send a guy with a high salary down in favour of a rookie who has a better camp... I think sometimes GM's don't want a lot of money playing in the minors as it may make them look bad. For example, I could see a guy like Stajan or Brouwer get outplayed in camp and still remain with the big club because they have reputations, built up a bit of a name and have big salaries.
Also, sure seems like every single year we get a player or three who has a tremendous camp yet still gets sent down for some middling veteran. It does actually seem to happen annually, and people seem to forget. So I don't completely share the concept that 'best players make the team' or that the NHL is a true meritocracy. Also don't think this is unique to the Flames for that matter.
Therefore, I think if people are worried that a vet gets signed like Jagr and bumps an up-and-coming rookie, that that worry is somewhat legitimate.
Last edited by Mr.Coffee; 08-27-2017 at 07:59 PM.
|