Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 122
  1. #81
    The Dolphin is Not Amused
    orpheus's Avatar
    Karma: 2218134
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    24,125
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    2311 Post(s)

    Default

    It's hard for me to be happy about this.

    It's hard for me to be angry about this.

    So it all evens out, I guess.

  2. #82
    Sausage King of Chicago
    santiclaws's Avatar
    Karma: 16855502
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    16,466
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    3262 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rajuabju View Post
    Stupid, pointless, short-signed and frivolous move. Reeks of desperation. Anyone who takes an honest look at our roster knows we are not competing seriously this year. And thus, we dont need cap space this year. To do what with it? sign someone with the savings we get and suddenly become SC contenders? Sign someone on a short-term deal to.... what?

    I see no end result in which this move makes our team better in any meaningful way. Blake is simply playing out the easy move in an attempt to improve optics short term. If he truly believes saving the cap space, in order to sign someone (anyone) and make us so much better than we'd become a serious team, he's truly delusional.

    Further, while Phanuef was bad last year, and not worth his contract, he was not awful to the point of not worthy of being played. He was fine as a bottom pairing D-man. Obviously overpaid, but still not so grossly bad as some make it to have been.

    The argument of using his spot for one of our prospects ... we dont need to buy him out to do that. He can be the #7 guy even and be a mentor.
    Yeah, but.... who gives a ****?? Really, what is so horrible about this move? They got rid of an overpaid, 6th-7th defenseman and saved a couple of millions of dollars. So what? Is it going to make the team better? No. Is it going to make it worse? No. So who gives a rat's ass?

  3. #83
    1st Scoring Line
    hokiecat's Avatar
    Karma: 2147483647
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    2,935
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1281 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aragorn View Post
    As opposed what it would have been at:
    $5M+, $5M+, gone. This isn't a big deal folks to get upset either way. $1M+ cap hits are almost entry level contracts these days, and the cap will probably be near $90M in year 3. Hey maybe with the $2M savings they won't raise the price of beer above $13?
    It is worth getting upset because it is typical Kings short-sightedness. If they wanted some cap hit savings, they could have buried him in Ontario and saved $1.075M per season. Instead they freed up 3M in cap money for this season, which is not needed, and screwed the future.

  4. #84
    Super Sexy
    Birdman's Avatar
    Karma: 1040000
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    16,290
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1782 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hokiecat View Post
    It is worth getting upset because it is typical Kings short-sightedness. If they wanted some cap hit savings, they could have buried him in Ontario and saved $1.075M per season. Instead they freed up 3M in cap money for this season, which is not needed, and screwed the future.
    Screwed the future? As in 2020-21 ? That's not the future as you described it, that's like TOMORROW. Barring a turn around, we ain't going to be ready to compete then. What glorious players do we have to extend next year ? I don't see any.

    Beyond that, its $1M and some change for 2 years.

    Keep sweeping out the barn Blakey. I see at least 2 forwards, another defenseman, and a Goalie that should be dealt before next Saturday. Get to making hay while the sun still shines!
    at the draft party a couple of years ago, and under a considerable haze, i heard Birdman yell out the following (about 4 or 5 times, i think) - "don't marry yourselves to players!" he went on to reiterate that idea more than once on the boards, and i believe it to be absolutely sage.

    ---gescom

  5. #85
    Classic player
    VCRW's Avatar
    Karma: 1074668763
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,043
    Images
    15
    Mentioned
    83 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    4084 Post(s)

    Default

    I can’t believe the knee-jerk Blake-bashing for this move. It’s a total nothing burger. The statistically worst (or close to it) defenseman in the league was excised from the team. A roster spot has been opened. The Kings now have 2 or 3 seasons to build a proper defense corps. Patience, please.

  6. #86
    Classic player
    VCRW's Avatar
    Karma: 1074668763
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,043
    Images
    15
    Mentioned
    83 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    4084 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hokiecat View Post
    It is worth getting upset because it is typical Kings short-sightedness. If they wanted some cap hit savings, they could have buried him in Ontario and saved $1.075M per season. Instead they freed up 3M in cap money for this season, which is not needed, and screwed the future.
    It can’t be stated often enough... Total cap hit means nothing to this rebuilding team. Cap floor is a more meaningful number.

    Perhaps the Kings did not believe Dion was valuable enough in a mentoring role to keep him in L.A. or Ontario. Unless you are privy to the discussions between the player, management and ownership, there is no way of knowing why the buyout route was chosen over other possible options. As the draft draws closer, there is always the possibility of a deal in the works that requires that contract and roster spot be available.

    I am far more concerned about what to do about Carter, Toffoli, Martinez and Quick.

  7. #87
    1st Scoring Line
    triplcrown's Avatar
    Karma: 2327317
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,330
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    445 Post(s)

    Default

    The Kings were done with him.

    They had had quite Phaneuf.

  8. #88
    2 Late to Change My Name
    HeadInjury's Avatar
    Karma: 2004862
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,193
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    450 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hokiecat View Post
    It is worth getting upset because it is typical Kings short-sightedness. If they wanted some cap hit savings, they could have buried him in Ontario and saved $1.075M per season. Instead they freed up 3M in cap money for this season, which is not needed, and screwed the future.
    Phaneuf couldn't be sent to Ontario without his agreement. In any event, he had a significant career and teams generally try to show a little respect in these situations. Buying him out gives him a shot at playing again somewhere else. He was done here. We get a roster spot. Uncle Phil saves $2 million. We get cap relief in year one if we want to get some assets for taking on an expiring contract. Now is losing $1 million in cap in years 3 and 4 worth it for all of the above? Seems like it to me.

  9. #89
    Sausage King of Chicago
    santiclaws's Avatar
    Karma: 16855502
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    16,466
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    3262 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by triplcrown View Post
    The Kings were done with him.

    They had had quite Phaneuf.

  10. #90
    Stanley Cup Champions !!
    Trapper9's Avatar
    Karma: 4011500
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    3,167
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    584 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by santiclaws View Post
    I disagree

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •