Saturday, April 12, 2008

I Like The Terms of Gilbert's New Contract


At least more so than I did yesterday.

LOWETIDE
& COVERED IN OIL put some sense in me.

Basically, Seabrook doesn't work as a comparison, nor does Tyutin. The 4 UFA seasons given up just can't be minimized. I was also probably wrong on the ''What you see is what you get'' mantra. Numerous examples have been pointed out that this theory is bunk.

One does have a legitimate argument that they should have offered Gilbert a short term deal (1-2 years) and make him earn that next contract. Of course the downside is you may end up paying more down the road, especially if the cap continues to rise. It seems Lowe and MacT feel otherwise, and feel confident in giving Gilbert an extension, despite only 1 full season worth of experience.

Time will tell whether they are right. At the same time, I can see their line of reasoning.

Heavy criticism may not be warranted at this point of time.

6 comments:

GSC said...

I still say Niklas Kronwall of Detroit is the best comparable to Gilbert, and an example of what Lowe should've done.

Kronwall: 4 year contract (3 UFA years given up), $3.375 MIL per. 26 years old.

180 NHL games played. 7-28-35, +25, 21:06 TOI/G this season. Plus, a 0.75 Desjardins rating compared to Gilbert's 0.50, so it's not like he plays soft minutes.

As much as I love Gilbert and his potential (some of it already being realized), $4 MIL is a hefty amount for just one season of performance.

Sean said...

Gotta throw out some respect! Not scared to bash a move or admit when your wrong (not that you were wrong yet, that remains to be seen).

LittleFury said...

Get outta my head PJO. Usually I stay clear of the internet on the wekends ("Shomer fucking Shabbat!" in the words of Walter Sobchak) but I was going to post a similar mea culpa on Monday. Anyway, it's an overpay but I guess I can live with it, though the risk is still pretty high, it's not Penner/Souray high. It's interesting that those two contracts make me pretty skeptical of pretty much any Lowe deal. Maybe I need to learn to be more credulous?

Though let me just say that I'll be watching very closely to see if Gilbert continues to develop and, if he stumbles, I'll be interested to see who among the faithful gives him the treatment Torres and Stoll are getting now.

GSC said...

This isn't 'Nam, littlefury, this is bowling. There are rules.

Asiaoil said...

Yeah it's a real show of confidence in Gilbert - but we are buying 4 full years of UFA time in his prime. Add 2 years to the Kronwall deal and it would look like Gibert's.

Basically Lowe and Co have a free pass from me on all defenseman deals - they have a pretty remarkable record over the past 6 or 7 years. Very few mistakes or poor evaluations. I even think the Souray signing could be OK if he is healthy next year.

What do people think: is the 2008 version of Gilbert and Grebs, plus a healthy Souray and Staios, and an older Greene and Smid....

better than....

the unproven 2007 version of Gilbert and Grebs, 2007 versions of Smid and Greene, plus Souray, Staios and Pitkanen.

I think we can afford to deal Pits - but I only want to do this if we get an elite player in return by throwing some combination of Stoll, Torres, Schremp onto the pile.

LittleFury said...

My biggest problem with the deal is that it basically greases the skids for Pits. I know the kid has issues, but that kind of raw talent just doesn't come along very often.

Of course, Lowe could theoretically lock Pitkanen up and deal salary elsewhere to make me look really dumb.

Maybe Roli plus gets moved to Ottawa. Damn that club needs a goalie.