Player Discussion Josh Norris (C) 6’-1” - Part 3
- Thread starter AchtzehnBaby
- Start date
Very Stable Genius
#WeLostOurKarlssons
Selling low/throwing in a pick and getting a veteran/more cap flexibility might be worth it to get a more rounded line-up if he continues like this the rest of the season.
Pre injury Norris was playing heavy hockey on a line with Tkachuk and Batherson
He missed camp and the first few games. That says the entire focus was on stabilizing that shoulder. So I'd think he went more or less a year without any real strength training and it shows in his lack of fight in battles.
I turned the tv off last need when Calgary went up 2. Did Norris get up? Or is he hurt?
He missed camp and the first few games. That says the entire focus was on stabilizing that shoulder. So I'd think he went more or less a year without any real strength training and it shows in his lack of fight in battles.
I turned the tv off last need when Calgary went up 2. Did Norris get up? Or is he hurt?
"Every time it goes in, ka-ching $$" -Tkachuk.
That S% was never sustainable and he never drove his own line, even at his best. Why they didn't go bridge deal I'll never understand. There was countless threads online advocating for this and many Sens fans I spoke with weren't sold on him. Gave him the bag to ensure Tkachuk's bff is happy. Soft.
Senator Stanley
Registered User
With Norris, the team has to make a call on what he is. Would they be "selling low" because he's actually going to be an $8M+ player, or would they be getting rid of him before the rest of the league figures out the contract is awful.
Personally, I'd start to shop him in the summer. I am not betting on a return (if we can call it that) to $8M form, and I'm comfortable building around Stutzle-Pinto-Greig as our top 9 centres.
And if he had gotten a bridge deal, the injury didn't happen, and he continued on his trajectory, someone just like you would now ask the question why on earth they bothered with a bridge deal instead of locking him up early, which would have allowed for a lower caphit...
Signing Norris was a perfectly normal decision that plenty of teams would have taken as well. Everyone and their mother tries to identify core-players and lock them into long-term deals as early as possible, because that is what you need to do if you want to be a contender. You wait too long, you have to throw tons of money at players. Not everyone would have done it, but that doesn't make it wrong or unusual at that time, because many teams would have done the same.
Look at Edmonton and Nurse. They bridged him for two years, and then he had a season in which he was 7th in Norris-voting, while having the second most goals and second most even-strength points among defensemen in the league. All while being one year away from UFA-status, with Klefbom's injury making Nurse by far the best player on the team's defense, and with other defensemen like Hamilton, Werensky or Jones signing for 9-9.5m. Without a bridge, you are looking at something like 7m at the most for a longterm deal, instead he got 9.25m due to his excellent performance that season, other defensemen getting similar deals, and Edmonton being all but forced to keep him at all cost with Klefbom's career in question. He held all the cards, something that people who trash that contract love to ignore.
This is what it means to try to succeed: you take risks to gain an advantage. Sometimes that works out, sometimes it fails, and no matter what you do, someone will always complain about why you didn't do the opposite. There is always someone who afterwards claims he knew it all along. The very same type of person rarely talks about the occasions where his claims couldn't have been more wrong though.
This is Norris' first season after a long-term injury that took him out for almost a whole year, that's not something you just ignore and go back to how you used to be right away. There is a chance that Norris will never get back on track, yes, and if he does, the bet will not have paid off, but long-term deals are signed for the long term, not to panic if one season goes wrong. He's still young, and his contract and stats are not so bad that no team would take a flyer on him to see if they could get him back on track.
The contract exists, it's not going away. The best way to move forward is to wait for what the new coach will do, and what having a healthy offseason might do for Norris' performance. After all, this season is already in the dumbster, and hardly anyone is performing well, Norris isn't going to buck the trend under those circumstances when no one else does either.
If he still isn't quite there after the circumstances have changed, then you think about alternative options.
I mean I'm sure there would be users complaining, but I wouldn't be one of them considering how vocal I was about going the bridge route.
We've locked up 5 other guys to long term deals, it's not like every single player who performs well needs a massive bag.
Loach
Registered User
- Jun 9, 2021
- 3,486
- 2,461
Senator Stanley
Registered User
We might see that once Pinto returns. For now, that's not really an option, but it could be worth a shot.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 57,092
- 34,851
I'm with you, he's been the defensive conscious of his lines at a pretty young age, and while there's still room to improve, he's generally making the right decisions in his end. Played a bit of a heavier game prior to the injury, hopefully he can get that back.
Idk if I'd want Stü on the wing long term but when Pinto is back it might be an option to give him a little less weight on his shoulders,
Stü-Norris-Giroux
Tkachuk-Greig-Batherson
Joseph-Pinto-Tarasenko
Kelly-Kastelic-MacEwen
That seems fairly balanced,
Loach
Registered User
- Jun 9, 2021
- 3,486
- 2,461
Sensinitis
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2012
- 15,984
- 5,593
Idk about that one. He’s way better defensively than Laine is a good two way center when he’s 100% and his offence isn’t going.
I suspect Greig might steal his 2C spot in the next year or two if he continues playing like this.
If he can't keep the pace which I believe was the reason then its not a solution
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 57,092
- 34,851
That's a different issue, what he wants takes a backdoor to what it takes to win was my point. If the coach thinks hon at center is a better option, he'll do it.
Loach
Registered User
- Jun 9, 2021
- 3,486
- 2,461
Giroux is exactly what this team needs. That being said, would you ask him if he wants to go to a playoff team? Out of respect for him. If he wants to stay, all the better. The team is pooched G. If you want the playoffs, we'll make it happen sort of thing.
OccidentalSoothsayer
Registered User
Loach
Registered User
- Jun 9, 2021
- 3,486
- 2,461
Didn't LA just trade and sign the guy? Lol. How 'bout we trade Norris for what LA gave up for PLD?
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 57,092
- 34,851
You want Vilardi, iafallo kapari and a 2nd?
Pld has a NTC that kicks in next year, if LA is having buyer's remorse they don't have a lot of time.
