MrCrowesGarden wrote:JCShutout wrote:Fat_Bulldog wrote:I just don't understand putting an injured player out there. From a long term injury risk standpoint and an overall team performance standpoint.
Wouldn't a completely healthy, less talented player be better overall? I just don't get it.
Like the deal with Yadi in the postseason last year....
I totally agree, for Steen's sake. I want him healthy for the long term.
His replacement probably would have been Paajarvi, and an injured Steen is probably the better player there... still don't think its a smart move considering Steen's career.
I wonder if Rattie would've even got some consideration. Probably not, but it'd be nice.
He should have. He really should play this year. I hate to say this, because I love Backes, but the Blues should lock up Schwartz long term, and then let Backes and Brouwer walk. I think Backes might be worth 5 or 6 mill next year (but I doubt it) but not in future years, and I don't want to handcuff the team when its time to extend guys like Fabbri and Paryko. Its just a bad age to extend a guy like Backes.
I see him as an okay 2nd liner, and a good 3rd liner right now. I think his 30 goal seasons are about past him. Gonna be tough to replace. I wish we could keep him at Berglund's salary for a few years.
Let them walk, let Fabbri have a top line. Let Rattie and Barbashev or another youngster have time with the big club. There will be growing pains, but you've just got the make the playoffs, and the rest is getting hot at the right time. You can probably afford both Schwartz and Shatty if you do that. If Schwartz makes 6+, that adds not quite all Backes' salary to him. If Shatty gets 6+, that adds not quite all of Ott's salary to him. Between them and their league minimum replacements, you basically have the same salary.