Quote:
Originally Posted by calculoso
If you want to talk risk…
There is risk to every contract (injuries are a real thing) and there is even bigger risk that a rebuild will not be successful. IMO when comparing the risks, it is a greater risk that the rebuild will not be successful (as many have in mind) than the risk that Huberdeau has 50 point years. Will he live up to the insane standard that some seem to have in mind? No. However would he be a $8m player instead of a $10m player? Now weight that against the blow it up and fail risk. What is the bigger risk?
|
He doesn't have to have 50 point years, if he increases it to 65, even 70 point years, he's hugely overpaid.
So since not all rebuild are successful, you never undertake them? There really isn't any choice. Once a team is aging and not a contender, there really isn't any other choice. I don't see that as a risk as much as "no viable alternative".
Calgary, due to cap constraints and UFA's do be, undoubtedly will need to run out a team that will have less viable players than last year, without any premium prospects on the horizon. Their hope is that a new coach will get more out of lesser players than Sutter did. There is certainly some chance they can be a playoff contender, although very much less likely they can be a cup contender.
The problem is, if that plan is not successful, the Flames window to rebuild quickly with premium younger assets obtained by rebuilding today may have closed somewhat.
Many of us believe the Flames should bite the bullet today when they can than delay to the inevitable and make the rebuild much longer.