joshjull
Registered User
Again, no one had a problem with you suggesting they should sign Mitts in the offseason if they planned to use him as the #1 center between Skinner/Tuch. They had an issue with you frequently bringing up his contract status and its cap implications in debates about lineups and who should be top 6 centers.That is exactly what I said..... if taken completely out of context
What I originally said and what I clarified in half a dozen posts and i can see it is still being misinterpreted is that Mitts should be extended BEFORE given a regular spot between Tuch and Skinner *if* Thompson (and later Cozens) are healthy and playing well*.
My initial post did not include the *starred* disclaimer, but within the context of the discussion where everyone was just throwing out line ideas, it was assumed that both players were healthy and continuing their upward swing, and I clarified that point in multiple posts.
My personal position has always been to re-sign Mitts. This particular discussion started and was ONLY about replacing a healthy, effective 94 point Tage with Mitts before signing Mitts and having him go off and price himself out of the Sabres cap situation(currently a real situation). You, as always, ignored the general spirit of the post to focus on what the post was never about, which was misconstrued as "keep Mitts on the third line no matter what to keep is contract low", which was just disingenuous misrepresentation of the entire discussion.
If you want to go back and waste your day searching for the entire conversation to post things out of context for your "gotcha" moment, (like you always do), be sure to include the post that started it all where it says "SIGN Mitts before the season starts if the plan is to have him be the #1 center". Also, please include the multiple posts that say "if tage is injured or not playing well, then casey should be the first player to be given 1st line center, regardless of contract status".
Your post I originally quoted also lamented about cap space and referenced your talking points about Mitts. Which is funny because your talking points were all about him playing on the #1 line and having his numbers ”inflated“ by Skinner/Tuch. Thus leading to bigger contract. You weren’t an advocate for extending him outside of that context. Not that you were against it, just that the urgency came from his possible use as the #1 center.
So it’s a bit much to see you acting as if you expected what’s happening right now with Mitts and getting on Adams. You clearly didn’t expect this since you expected Mitts‘s strong numbers coming from who he played with (getting “inflated” if you will). As opposed to him being the driving force from the start of the season as the 3rd line center and doing well with various wingers.
I think your attacks on Adams over Mitts contract situation in this thread have been off the mark. There was never any chance he would sign an extension with 5 or 6mil AAV for two reasons.
1) Mitt’s camp would never agree to it
2) Adams can’t make him sign it.
Adams could have extended him but it would cost more than you allowing for. I expect he eventually extends for somewhere in the 7-8mil range.