What Was the Worst Signing Today?

[TheJoeGreene]

Originally Posted by saXon

Show me a player (not a rookie) that has earned 5 x his contract from the previous amount, and where it's worked out that that said player kept earning that large $$ amount going forward. Keep obvious bridge contracts and ELC's out of it.

Good luck.

Could you please put the goalposts back where they were in the first place?

[herashak]

Has to be orpik

[bubbsy]

Are the caps that much better after investing the 11 million per year in their d for orpik and niskanen?!?

I suppose if trots is gonna be successful he needs some big time d. Only problem is that neither are #1 guys.

[Fire]

Originally Posted by saXon

Show me a player (not a rookie) that has earned 5 x his contract from the previous amount, and where it's worked out that that said player kept earning that large $$ amount going forward. Keep obvious bridge contracts and ELC's out of it.

Good luck.

The amount of his previous contract is totally irrelevant when you are talking about a UFA. Smid makes more money than Engelland and is also considered a 3rd pairing defenseman. I don't remember many people complaining about his contract. A few did but not many.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by 19Yzerman19

See, this, for example, is much more aggressive and personally insulting than anything I've said.

Incidentally, "homer" does not mean "idiot". It means someone is biased and their opinion is influenced by that bias to a point where it is not particularly credible.

This isn't the sense I get at all. Unconventional opinions are easily, and usually pretty snidely, dismissed.

I think you did, or there's very little chance that you would have gotten the point I was trying to make.

Because it's a discussion board with a quote function. The title of a thread sets a topic for discussion. People then say what they think about that. Then other people say what they think about what the first people thought, and so on. This is how a message board works. You really believe that the standard should be not to disagree with anyone?

Actually, I did - AFTER I replied and posted my reply. Doesn't take a genius to understand where you were going with that, especially reading some of your other abrasive posts in the past. I find it hilarious when posters post so abrasively that it causes a stir, and then throw up their hands in their claiming they are getting ganged up on. There are many posters from other teams even that are highly respected on these forums. It isn't about a different viewpoint or argument - it is how you make your points and how they are received. Understand?

[19Yzerman19]

Originally Posted by trackercowe

We get it you didn't like the deal; can you stop spamming the board saying as much?

I'm assuming you're talking about Engelland but I posted my opinion on that one no more than I did on others. IMO it wasn't even in the top 3 worst contracts handed out today. Some I hated some I disliked some I was okay with and a couple I liked (including the Hiller deal). Don't think it's spam, it just stood out to you because it's a Flames signing.

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

It isn't about a different viewpoint or argument - it is how you make your points and how they are received. Understand?

I think it's both actually but I also see where everyone's coming from on this and will try to do a better job of taking the edge off my posts.

[Wolfman]

Orpik or Niskanen...Caps spent a lot of money today. All the power to them. Glad we didn't get those types of deals.

[1stLand]

The Iggy signing was the worst.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by 19Yzerman19

I'm assuming you're talking about Engelland but I posted my opinion on that one no more than I did on others. IMO it wasn't even in the top 3 worst contracts handed out today. Some I hated some I disliked some I was okay with and a couple I liked (including the Hiller deal). Don't think it's spam, it just stood out to you because it's a Flames signing.

I think it's both actually but I also see where everyone's coming from on this and will try to do a better job of taking the edge off my posts.

Take a break from the keyboard for a while and go enjoy Canada Day.

Come back tomorrow or whenever, but on this subject, today, it is time to take a knee

[Geeoff]

Orpik and Bolland seem to be guaranteed future buyouts.

[Parallex]

Orpik and it's not even close.

[GGG]

When evaluating the worst contract I think you need to look at the opportunity cost of the aquisition, the value of what you get, and the risk or liklyhood you will get that value. And you have to consider the situation of the team that signed him,

Englland doesnt even make the list as the worst outcome for the flames is that he never dresses and eats a 3 mil cap hit for 3 years. That has almost zero affect on the flames the upside might be low but the downside is zero.

Compare that to any team who made a signing with an internal budget or cap issues and their deals carry inherently more risk and more liklyhood of that risk being realized.

The only homerism going on in this thread is anyone thinking the Engllend deal is worthy of discussion in context with the big deals of the day.

[DuffMan]

Iginla

[Wastedyouth]

Engelland. If only because I think it shows a stunning lack of intelligence by Treliving.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

Engelland. If only because I think it shows a stunning lack of intelligence by Treliving.

Yeah, sure. I bet his hockey mind is vastly inferior to yours.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Yeah, sure. I bet his hockey mind is vastly inferior to yours.

Hey now. Just stating my opinion. I'm trying to keep away from making the broad statements that I was before to keep from being too aggravating.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

Engelland. If only because I think it shows a stunning lack of intelligence by Treliving.

Treliving lacks intelligence? Lol

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Treliving lacks intelligence? Lol

Not too sure what you are implying. Care to explain?

[Wolfman]

Did you mean to say "It's only because I think" or did you actually mean "if only because I think"?

[combustiblefuel]

Holy some posts made here today make me wonder how many drinks people had for Canada Day.