Divisional Opponent Watch: Gaborik placed on IR

Marian Gaborik continues to replace Forsberg as the most fragile player in the NHL. His chances at re-signing with the Wild must have taken a hit with his move to IR. If his injuries continue, you can bet on Gaborik being traded by the deadline.

about 1 year ago InYoFace 10 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Gaborik

Gaborik reportedly wants Crosby/Malkin/ Ovechkin money… but who’s going to be willing to pay that when he gets hurt every season?

I believe in Peter Budaj

by Jibblescribbits on Oct 26, 2008 1:19 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

Gaborik definitely is comparable to those players when you stretch his numbers out to a 82 game season. He did really let down his team against us in the play-offs last year. But I’m willing to admit that has nothing to with his qualities cus the Avs defense is solid and Theo was pretty much playing godlike against the Wild.
The team that’s gonna get him just needs to plan accept that he’s gonna play 40/50 game seasons and plan his cap accordingly.

That’s also why I think the cap should be on a yearly bases. It would really help out players like Gabby and Svatos and gives more room for GMs to excel at what they do.

26 Card Jet

by Tommelot on Oct 26, 2008 2:22 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

But fragile players are always going to be a a disadvantage regardless of how the cap works. Why would you pay good money for someone who could get injured at any time when you could pay less for someone who’ll play every game. And why would you pay money for Arnason full stop, can someone gently cripple him, not enough to seriously injure him, but enough to put him on the IR.

"To have arrived on this Earth as a product of a biological accident, only to depart through human arrogance, would be the ultimate irony"
R. Leakey, Origins; 1977
"Two roads divurged in a wood, and I took the one less travelled by, and that has made all the difference"
R. Frost

by Savage33 on Oct 26, 2008 3:58 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why would you pay good money for someone who could get injured at any time

You wouldn’t if the cap is based on a yearly rating! That’s why it’s so purfect!

can someone gently cripple [Arnason]

Or trade him for a 7th round pick to the Oilers. Anything will do!
But honestly, his game isn’t THAT bad. He’s mainly invisible on the ice (although he looked like a figure-skater with all the turns he made with 4 and a half minutes to go in the 3rd versus the Oilers. That probably was his most memorable play so far.
The problem I have with Arny is that he’s stealing ice-time from TJ Hensick!

26 Card Jet

by Tommelot on Oct 26, 2008 4:52 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

the fact he’s invisible is the biggest problem to his game. he’s not being noticed doing anything good, or bad really, he’s just not out there. I have nothing against the guy and think he’s probably a great person to be around but he should not be in the Avs side, that i agree with you on.
I may have misunderstood you on the cap thing, If you mean based on a players overall ranking at the end of the year then i could see them getting paid more but they’d still have to play a full year to get the good money which seems to bet their main problem.

by Savage33 on Oct 27, 2008 1:03 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

What I mean with the cap thing, is probably best explained by example:

Player A makes 6M per 82 games. So 6M/82 $/game. The total cap hit FOR THE ENTIRE season is 56M.
So if Player A playes 10 games, he will reduce the cap with 56M-(6M/82*10). That way teams could easily have a really expensive team one half of the season (for example 80M over 82 games) and then phone it in for the other half and have players who make 500k in their line-up. Just as long as the TOTAL cap hit would still be 56M

26 Card Jet

by Tommelot on Oct 27, 2008 7:13 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I get your point now

but i don’t think that would ever work, the rich teams like the Avs, Rangers would just spend as much as they could like they did before the cap and then when they’ve dominated the first half they’d go with the cheaper players and still make the playoffs. Plus it would be too confusing for everyone.

by Savage33 on Oct 27, 2008 3:59 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

your point?

26 Card Jet

by Tommelot on Oct 27, 2008 6:11 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

No Point

I was killing time before work. I say get rid of the cap altogether and let the rich spend what they want. No-ones gonna hold a gun to any GM’s head and make them spend everything in the bank.

by Savage33 on Oct 28, 2008 2:25 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I thought about it some more (sober this time) and came to the conclusion that I’m an effing genius!
It has nothing to do with rich or poor teams, because EACH team would spend 56M (see example) over the course of 1 year. It would actually have 2 main changes

1. Often injured class A players would be more capfriendly
2. GMs would be (more) able to outline the course of the team.

26 Card Jet

by Tommelot on Oct 28, 2008 2:41 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs