TeamRenzo
Registered User
- Jul 20, 2009
- 3,180
- 1,080
Are you trying to argue that signing Stone isnt a good play for the long term? Just trying to wrap my head around what your argument is. I want them to spend money on making the team better, they are spending 13 million below the cap floor I do want them to spend money to be good in the future yes. You know instead of when they eat salary to get real assets not dump other salary back not hard to understand. I have a very good concept of where this team is thanks. They just finished dead last with Stone, Duchene, Dzingel on the team for most of the year. Why do you think they will be so much better with only Stone? .... They are going to be the worst team in hockey this year with or without him. Atleast if he was here he could show them good work habits, lead by example and take the hard matchups.
Dude, you sound like you are becoming unhinged, you are all over the place.
Why would Stone want to sign a long term extension to stay with a team that is going to be awful for the foreseeable future?
My point (not argument) is that this team is not going to be a playoff team for several years and our fate won't change with a few mediocre pieces. With that being understood, it only makes sense to remove as much cost as possible. I don't see how a reasonable person isn't able to grasp this concept.