BurghersAndDogsSports wrote:Well then I stand corrected. $5 million makes you an idiot but 3 contracts for 34-35 year olds for 4 more years each close to $4 million makes you a legend.
Also, to a post above why do people get so offended when the Pens are referred to as old? when they were the oldest team in the playoffs and 4 of 5 guys signed this summer are 34 or older?
I get that the core is young but a part of our problem is depth and speed and the ability to come in waves at the other team. Age has something to do with that, not to mention everyone's fear of these recent contracts/players age and ability in a few years.
In 3 years the core will be 30 and we will be surrounding them with a handful of 38 year olds. It's a valid concern.
Claiming average age is misleading:
- There is a 3.5 year difference between the oldest and the youngest team in the league going into next season.
- Last year we were .05 years old than the Bruins. Are you saying that's why we lost? Boston is less than a year older than Chicago. Are you saying that's why they lost? If we worried about average age, Toronto, Los Angeles, and Ottawa should have had better playoff runs, as they are all younger than the teams that defeated them.
In regards to the guys we signed, odds are they don't stay here if they are offered shorter contracts. Part of taking a cut meant that they get length on the deals.
So, let's just say that Shero lets them walk. Who do we replace them with that both fits in our budget AND keeps us competitive? Keep in mind that Kunitz and Dupuis combined for 42 goals, 48 assists, and 90 points in a 48 game season.