My immediate reaction was, "that's a lot to pay for 1.5 years of Blake Coleman"... because it's not like they're going to be able to re-sign him after next season. Or if they do, they'll need to let someone of equivalent value walk to do it, so it's a wash. Meanwhile Nolan Foote is going to be in the NHL next year, probably, and he'll cost even less against the cap. Why not just go that route? Sure, I guess there's the uncertainty about a rookie being a good contributor at this level when Coleman already is, but there's also uncertainty about a guy producing on a basement dweller being able to do something similar on the best team in the NHL.
__________________
"The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
|