Now this is amusing:
As is this:
Revolutionizing the Thrashers, one important decision at a time.
UPDATE: Vivlamore has typed up the whole bizarre exchange with Dudley.
Q. Do you know if he has a preference, forward or defenseman?
A. He likes to play defense.
Q. How would moving him to defense affect your forwards?
A. If we don’t do anything else [signing-wise], than it depends on what some of the people do who come in at forward, whether or not they grab us. If we did something else up front, it would make it more likely that we would play him, at least for the time being, on defense. … [Alexander] Burmistrov, [Patrice] Cormier, [Spencer] Machacek, [Anthony] Stewart, [Angelo] Esposito. If one, or all of these guys, steps up to the plate it makes it easier to move Buff to defense or give him that opportunity.
5 comments:
Makes me a little scared to think they could be that far off on value. I mean, Bergy has one year under his belt and I can't imagine we're offering less than an avg of $2.25 M per year. Perhaps he thinks he's worth in excess of $3 M and his agent is just dipping that initial toe in the water?
Byfuglien on defense? Is it because we are in such need of defensemen or is it because we are so stacked on T6 forwards? Oh wait, neither of those are true. I want to read this blog entry.
Those that read this blog know I'm no fan of Dudley. My take is this:
Let's say you are dying of starvation. Bergfors represents... say a pizza. Does it make much sense to say, well... I'm starving, here is this pizza for sale for $25. I have $25, but the market for this pizza is $20. I think I'll pass, starve in the process, because I'm not gonna over pay.
Let's say Buff is a steak that you already have in your possesion. But rather than eating it, you decide to use the steak as a duster mop to reach that hard to clean area behind the toilet. And starve in the process. But at least the toilet is clean.
Doesn't make any sense to me.
For the long-term, it would seem to make more sense to keep Bergfors than Byfulgien. However, if Nick doesn't want to be here, than be proactive about cashing in on his value.
Trade his rights along with one of our many D-men (Valabik, Hainsey, Sopel--in that order of priority) to get the negotiating rights for Neal, Handzal, Gagner or any other 15-30 goal scorer who may be on the market.
I haven't commented on his blog yet, but this idea is directly based on the former Mr. Speaker's blog. If there's a way to turn Berg + D for Neil or Gagner, then why not try it? If we're that far apart with Bergfors and it's known around the league what kind of potential he has, then why not cash in on it? Plus by trading one of our defenders, we shed salary and get a proven player who's ready to step in right away and we have the ability to pay them over the long term...along with all the other players we currently have who should show they're worthy of a long-term investment.
Dudley's already shown he's not going to mess around with any players/agents. If this drags out until training camp, I wouldn't be surprised to see a deal put together.
I'd rather see Bergfors here than somewhere else, but if he doesn't want to be here, than you don't want him in the locker room. Not with the group of veterans, promising youngsters, and Cup-winners who are on our roster right now.
When did Bergfors ever say he didn't want to be here? Everyone is saying that, but I don't remember reading it anywhere. People jump to conclusions too quickly. Just because they can't agree on a $ amount doesn't mean he wants to leave.
Post a Comment