Your first assumption is that the team will correctly identify and cut the weakest links off the roster. Your next assumption is that those weak links will be young prospects instead of 4th liners. This is what your argument is built upon.
It's poor planning to overload the roster with static contracts. Depth can be had via call ups. What Benning did here is bring in bottom end fodder that cannot be easily moved. And so, he's caught between having to waive pieces with more potential, or trading waiving/veteran contracts. That's somehow good planning? He's boxed himself in.
There was nothing preventing him from signing Czarnik, Shore, Peca etc... players on the cusp. Ones that if they were sent down, it wouldn't be a disaster parking of an onerous contract. Instead, he locked the lowest value positions on the team so that he will be forced to send down better potential assets. Do you understand?
You have yet to post a roster with the youngest players still on the team. Post a full roster with Goldobin, Leipsic, Gaunce, Granlund, Gaudette all making it. What happens then?
It's very simple: If your automatic response to creating a roster with young players is to trade/waive veterans on poor contracts, then you've admitted that the roster is needlessly bloated.
ok this is better.
It has to be an assumption? For all i know Horvat is being traded for Jacob Trouba next week? Secondly they go into an offseason with a plan for who will be where next year and one summer doesn't change the progression of a prospect so much that the team has to make big adjustments. i'm sure xxxxx will not work out so hard this summer (4 months) to completely transform who they are as a athlete. So yes my assumptions are that Gagner Granlund Leipsic Goldobin Gaunce Gaudette Dahlen Lind etc will be behind the 4 marketed forwards (Horvat Boeser Virtanen Pettersson) and the 6 vets with term (Eriksson Sutter Baertschi Roussel Beagle Schaller)
As far as my second assumption....i base it on quotes from the coach, my viewings of all last years games and feedback from posters here on their evaluations of their play. At the end of the day it's just my opinion which doesn't matter if you disagree.
I'm not sure what the static contract is? All roster players that don't make it are going to Utica and will be recalled as depth when needed if cleared....this is how it works Gagner Granlund Gaunce and Goldobin have been bad and lets be honest only Goldobin holds any potential at this point worth mining. Of the 8 players i mentioned for 3 spots how many of them do you see as btm6 types that can play the roles of Hansen Torres Malhotra Lapierre.......Gaudette?? Gaunce?? Gadjovich and Madden when he's ready....MacEwen??? point being they dont have much in the pipeline for btm 6 players ready to go and the 3 signings buy them some time and provide good service (for the first part at least)
When they targetted Schaller Roussel and Beagle you can bet your ass it was after consultation with Green and the fact that last years team was small slow and weak. Travis was often quoted that he wanted to play fast and hard. Not many players in last years team fit that narrative. So the signings will play and based on last years work and previous these 3 players are better fits for the roles that Travis Green wants to fill and improve upon. You dont target a free agent on a one way on July 1st and then cut them because of a weak camp. It would have to be really really bad and conversely giving a spot to a player after a small sample exhibition season also comes with risks don't you think?
i already posted the roster...sans Gaunce who is no more a prospect than Granlund Pouliot and Leipsic at this point and looks to be by the signings on his way elsewhere unless a shocking move of both Gagner and Granlund are cut/traded. I know some of you like this player but he provides nothing offensively and is not tough nor creative fast or deceptive. I think the point of younger is not better has been driven home enough with the opinions on age gap aquisitions. Applying all your names to the roster based on zero past merit is not a road worth going down and as shown i did it without Gaunce and i see you have now added Granlund to try and make this go round and round.
To your last point... do you think the leafs care that one of their centres is getting cut or re assigned this fall due to Tavares being signed? Obviously an extreme example but even lower in the roster if you can improve your team and you do so and it costs someone their job thats the nature of the beast. Gagner has been waived before, Calagay was moving on from Granlund. Do you not think Benning has the balls to do it. He has before.
I disagree with your notion that we have needlessly bloated the roster and that prospects are being blocked. If Del Zotto Pouliot Gagner Granlund Gaunce and Nilsson were replaced tomorrow with Gaudette Hughes Juolevi Demko Dahlen Lind do you think Benning would have a hard time saying goodbye and would you? What is his loss.......a few overpaid contracts in Utica Shinkaruk and a 4th?.......a couple of them would get claimed or traded. Maybe even a surplus for our draft??
