Phaneuf, a guy getting paid $7 million, was miscast as a #3 defeceman...
You don't see this as part of the problem? Or that, even with retained salary by Ottawa, him being a #5 d-man in LA is a farce?
What? That he is overpaid? Yeah and? It's been known for years and that's why he's pretty inexpensive to acquire in terms of assets. He has 3 years left at 5.25, maybe he is still a bit overpaid but it won't be too crippling for a rich team like LA. The cap is at 80 M$ now and it will continue to rise. If they are in cap hell, they will do what is necessary, anything is possible with money. It was a really good move for LA. Getting a capable veteran D-man while getting rid of an aged and broken down forward on the brink of LTIR/retirement.
AND I didn't say that Phaneuf was a #5, I SAID that he has the luxury to be the #5 in LA because of all the quality D-men they have.
FFS, despite literally admitting Phaneuf got slower this past seasn and that this impacted his game, you can't even own up to the fact that you once claimed him already being slow meant him getting slower wouldn't hurt his game and/or meant he couldn't get slower...this is just ridiculous. Right up there with your "rebuilds take up to 17 years" nonsense.
The whole point was to show how ridiculous your line of thinking is (btw, he's not even 35, the age you claimed he'd still play well up to...unless you're going to argue his salary doesn't matter when evaluating play? I mean, that's a nice thought, but it's utterly ridiculous, especially with a salary cap).
Where did I say that Phaneuf got slower this past season? I only said "Phaneuf slowing down really hurt his efficiency". It just means that him slowing down in the last few years hurt his efficiency and you can't expect him to be your #2 or #3 anymore... I mean, in the post you dug up from 20 months ago, I did say "Phaneuf is already slow" and I even told you in my last post but you still come back with the same point? Is it serious? Anyway, nothing has changed, Phaneuf is still slow and I still don't see why he can't be a capable #4-6 for the next 3 years. He's still young enough and healthy.
Did you read my whole conversation with Bankstreetparade? Seriously, do you even understand? The whole point was to say that without Methot, the Sens were without a #2 AND a #3, but two #4 instead in Phaneuf and Ceci FORCED to play as the #2 and #3 guys. Can you see the problem or you still don't? Of course, I can't explain everything over and over again in every post.
So cut your crap, you're trying so hard to discredit me when you don't even understand the context in the first place, ridiculous and pathetic at the same time. Your weak attempt pretty much blew up in your own face, congrats.
And you're only proving my point further by suggesting Ceci, a veteran with nearly 400 NHL games worth of experience if you include the playoffs, "can get there." I'm sorry, but by and large, a player with that much NHL experience is what he is.
Maybe you mistake me with someone else but I have not said that, in at least a long time (so go ahead a dig up more 2 years ago posts
)
Anyway, to answer your question :
Ceci is NOT A SHUTDOWN #2 D-man getting the 2nd most shifts per year in the whole NHL. He won't "get there". He is what he is at this point, or what he should be on a normal team, a 2-way #4, possibly a #3 in his prime.
It seems that you really have a problem with reading comprehension.
