Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Patience ... this will pay off ...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Locally here in Edmonton they call it the "Decade of Darkness" and even this year (year #12) they might miss the playoffs...being crappy for that long is no guarantee of success or the cup.

    Comment


    • #22
      I don't think that pairing a no-professional-coaching-experience head coach can't ever work with a rebuilding/young team, but I think that the right supplement of veteran players needs to be involved as well (I'm thinking along the lines of vets that study the game and what it takes to win, and maybe are likely to end up coaching because of their by example mentoring -- like a later career Guy Carbonneau or Kirk Muller).

      I look, but don't find, such characteristics in the holdover core that became what are now the veterans.

      And the recent veteran additions I see here -- Weise, Filppula, Lehterä -- make me long for a return of Ed Snider if only just for a redux of the "I don't care if you send them to the minors or to Europe or wherever, just get them off my team, now!" Nedved/Dimitrakos moment.

      As for the coach, I've now fully embraced wanting Hakstol to go, but I fear replacing him mid-season lest the team just end up with a crappy NHL-coaching-carousel retread because of the rush to get a quick replacement coach in during a break between games. Yet this failed mix of Hakstol and these veterans makes the thought of nearly sixty more games of them excruciating. (F**k, there is really that much of the season left and yet they are already so hopelessly done?!?)

      Comment


      • #23
        Good article in today's Inquirer about hope and the future, but it is 2 years off.

        Comment


        • #24
          I think it's time to move on from Giroux and Voracek as well if we possibly can. Do this rebuild properly and load up for the upcoming drafts. Can't hurt, it's quite obvious we are not going to do anything in the Giroux era in Philly, maybe we should fish or cut bait.
          Pieces are in place for the future. We still need a top pairing defenseman and a scoring winger. Doesn't look like we are going to get anything from Free Agency or a trade due to our cap limitations. Development years ahead.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by evee1234 View Post
            I think it's time to move on from Giroux and Voracek as well if we possibly can. Do this rebuild properly and load up for the upcoming drafts. Can't hurt, it's quite obvious we are not going to do anything in the Giroux era in Philly, maybe we should fish or cut bait.
            I think the more interesting way to ask this question is: what package would make us trade one of them? same for simmonds.

            Comment


            • #26
              Simmonds is easier for me.

              I want a 23/24 year old top 9 forward and a 1st or 2nd depending on quality of said player..

              Richards got us Simmonds, Schenn and a 2nd.

              Simmonds isn't Richards..but his return should be a "now piece" and a future piece.

              And yeah I'd trade Simmonds for Galchenyuk and the better of MTL or CHIs 2nd in 2018.



              Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk

              Comment


              • #27
                Schenn with a hat trick last night.
                Pieces are in place for the future. We still need a top pairing defenseman and a scoring winger. Doesn't look like we are going to get anything from Free Agency or a trade due to our cap limitations. Development years ahead.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Frost with 4 points the other night...

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    I could be inclined to trade Voracek this year as it might get the biggest haul based on him being in a good year. Simmonds I would rather keep for his leadership on this otherwise super-blah team, even if he may start to wear down from the abuse he takes as a result of his style.

                    Giroux I'd be inclined to keep for a number of reasons, but the top being I don't know if the return could be as much (or as little) as I'd want and especially so if Voracek were moved first. (or vice versa).
                    I start with thinking of how many teams in this cap era can take on a long-term $8+ million contract -- and, as soon as one of either Voracek or Giroux might be moved, that should be one less team available when seeking to move the other. Their conteacts are way too long for me to want to risk any salary retention and the years of resulting dead cap space. And, at this point, I sure as **** also don't want to see any other ****ty multi-year contracts coming back in order to make the $$ work! (Another Lehterä for a few more years taking a roster spot that blocks a prospect & for a contract in a $3-5 million yearly range? Hell No!).
                    So I measure the "net" return in both the assets that are acquired PLUS the return liabilities that are avoided. I just don't think as good a net return will be found for trading away the second $8+ million player compared to how I'd value keeping that second player as is.
                    Last edited by AIK1891; 12-06-2017, 02:13 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Giroux is also top-10 in faceoff percentage...not exactly the most dazzling of stats but the dude does more than just an offense-only top line skater (ala Voracek).

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X