HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Edmonton Oilers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=38)
-   -   McGuire on York (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=16520)

mudcrutch79 10-03-2003 04:49 AM

McGuire on York
 
Don't know if anyone caught the TSN report on Sportscentre about the Oilers last night, but one comment in particular caught my attention. McGuire mentioned that York is a "disappointment" for the Oilers.

Now I know that his offensive totals were down from the year before, but does anyone know how this can be backed up? He had a broken wrist last year, for god's sake. I also remember that early in the season, MacT said that he thought that the way in which York was being used was probably hurtinbg his numbers, because they were basically using him to fill holes.

Where does McGuire get "dissapointment" from?

oilers_guy_eddie 10-03-2003 04:53 AM

He certainly had a disappointing start to last season... but from the time he broke out of the slump right up to the wrist injury, he was awesome.

Yanner39 10-03-2003 05:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mudcrutch79
Don't know if anyone caught the TSN report on Sportscentre about the Oilers last night, but one comment in particular caught my attention. McGuire mentioned that York is a "disappointment" for the Oilers.

Now I know that his offensive totals were down from the year before, but does anyone know how this can be backed up? He had a broken wrist last year, for god's sake. I also remember that early in the season, MacT said that he thought that the way in which York was being used was probably hurtinbg his numbers, because they were basically using him to fill holes.

Where does McGuire get "dissapointment" from?

I saw that too...I have not idea where he got that...I mean, K-lo only gave York some slack after the Dallas series bcause he was injured...

Very strange comment and he's usually pretty bang with his assessment...

I just think he should look at switching to brewed decaf for a while...

Mr Sakich 10-03-2003 05:37 AM

york had 51 points in the 56 games before his injury. That would be a 75 point season pace while playing on 3 different lines and 8 different players. One thing mact said about sticks in my head (paraphrased)

"whenever a player is struggling, we put him on york's line. York makes his linemates better rather than feeding off them like carter."

IMO, York could really surprise this year. I usually like maguire because he has a real hate on for the leafs but he didn't do his homework this time.

Vyse64 10-03-2003 05:38 AM

PM also added that york was unhappy about being traded to edmonton anyone remember when York said that?

barto 10-03-2003 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HemskyFreak83
PM also added that york was unhappy about being traded to edmonton anyone remember when York said that?

I don't know if York was ever quoted as saying that, but it seemed pretty obvious that he was upset to have been traded ANYWHERE, as he really liked it with the Rangers. And it was his first trade, so there was that shock, and I don't think he knew anyone on the team or knew anything about Edmonton. It took him the summer to get used to the idea and to get to know some of the guys, and he came into camp last fall with a much different attitude & mindset.

He had a very good year, was definitely our best forward for long stretches, and SO bloody versatile! Good move by Lowe to get this guy for Poti! :handclap:

I suspect York really likes it here now - he sure seems comfortable (not in a bad way) out on the ice & in interviews.

Bart

thome_26 10-03-2003 06:18 AM

Perhaps he was just talking about how he had a bad start and he was injured and the Oilers were disapointed about that (not with him, but with what happened to him). I only watched the clip once, but on CHED PM said he really liked York.

jofa 10-03-2003 06:26 AM

That's funny, as I was yelling at Pierre this morning too when I heard that. Dissapointment? Wasn't he like the Oilers player of the year or something? I found their whole overview of the Oilers to be frustrating, as they just don't seem to get what Lowe is doing or the direction the team is heading. I mean, they were implying that the Oilers are still trying to get over the loss of Guerin and Weight? Hello... ? Tell me why we, or any team, would want to wrap up $17.5 million of salary on these two players?

Somehow, we'll try to get through the "disappointment"...

thome_26 10-03-2003 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jofa
That's funny, as I was yelling at Pierre this morning too when I heard that. Dissapointment? Wasn't he like the Oilers player of the year or something? I found their whole overview of the Oilers to be frustrating, as they just don't seem to get what Lowe is doing or the direction the team is heading. I mean, they were implying that the Oilers are still trying to get over the loss of Guerin and Weight? Hello... ? Tell me why we, or any team, would want to wrap up $17.5 million of salary on these two players?

Somehow, we'll try to get through the "disappointment"...

If we went back in time and signed Guering, we'd be minus Hemsky and Dvorak. I can't imagine how less bright the future is with Billy G. instead of Hemmer!!!! Lowe really ***** the Bruins in that deal! (the bruins have....... NOTHING) the Oilers now have Hemsky and Dvorak.

jofa 10-03-2003 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thome_26
If we went back in time and signed Guering, we'd be minus Hemsky and Dvorak. I can't imagine how less bright the future is with Billy G. instead of Hemmer!!!! Lowe really ***** the Bruins in that deal! (the bruins have....... NOTHING) the Oilers now have Hemsky and Dvorak.

why'd we be without hemsky? i thought it was a second round pick that came over with carter... ?



love the banana :banana:

jadeddog 10-03-2003 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jofa
That's funny, as I was yelling at Pierre this morning too when I heard that. Dissapointment? Wasn't he like the Oilers player of the year or something? I found their whole overview of the Oilers to be frustrating, as they just don't seem to get what Lowe is doing or the direction the team is heading. I mean, they were implying that the Oilers are still trying to get over the loss of Guerin and Weight? Hello... ? Tell me why we, or any team, would want to wrap up $17.5 million of salary on these two players?

Somehow, we'll try to get through the "disappointment"...

lol, i couldnt agree more.... i wouldnt take guerin in a straight up trade for hemsky, let alone guerin for hemsky AND dvorak..... not a freaking chance. and as far as im concerned, ill be more than happy to let st. louis pay weight 8 million a year, ill keep comrie as well in that deal (lol, though we prolly wont have comrie anymore)

the reason hemsky comes over in the guerin deal, is because we got a 1st rounder swap option with the bruins that year (2001). we swapped with them for the 13th pick and got hemsky with that pick.

on a similar note though, that weight trade sure looks TERRIBLE now doesnt it? i like reasoner and all, but reasoner for weight, not exactly a good deal.

jadeddog 10-03-2003 07:09 AM

one more thing about that weight trade... i personally dont see why we couldnt have traded him to the islanders that year for their pick (and gotten spezza). if they took yashin, you would think they would have taken weight. we might have maybe given them a 2nd rounder as well or something, but it would have been totally worth it..... yes as you can tell im still pretty upset we didnt get more for weight... oh well

igor* 10-03-2003 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thor dyck
york had 51 points in the 56 games before his injury. That would be a 75 point season pace while playing on 3 different lines and 8 different players. One thing mact said about sticks in my head (paraphrased)

"whenever a player is struggling, we put him on york's line. York makes his linemates better rather than feeding off them like carter."

IMO, York could really surprise this year. I usually like maguire because he has a real hate on for the leafs but he didn't do his homework this time.

I like York ... but Lowe says a lot of things. I think he was trying to pre-empt (is that a word?) any "what's the matter with York" articles from the writers, because for the most part York never really clicked with anybody at 5on5 hockey. He did really well on the poewrplay though, results-wise, especially when he was on the point. And the York-Marchant tandem was a great PK duo IMO.

The opposition scored a swack of goals on the Oilers when York was out there ... at least until after Christmas when he was put with Marchant and did well. Really the only other player that he meshed with though, by my eye and by the numbers, was Marchant. He got decent results while playing with Smyth too, but everybody did.

I think York will lead the team in special-teams minutes this season. So the second line will be the logical place to play him 5on5, to keep him from wearing down.

Will he click with Dvorak? I really hope so.

Narnia 10-03-2003 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jadeddog
one more thing about that weight trade... i personally dont see why we couldnt have traded him to the islanders that year for their pick (and gotten spezza). if they took yashin, you would think they would have taken weight. we might have maybe given them a 2nd rounder as well or something, but it would have been totally worth it..... yes as you can tell im still pretty upset we didnt get more for weight... oh well

Talk to Doug "39 shackles" Weight. Weight said he'd only go to either Detroit and St. Louis. Edmonton wanted to trade him to the Islanders but Weight blocked the trade to the Islanders. They could have had that draft pick as part of the trade. He then blocked Demitra coming to Edmonton from St. Louis. Tell me who made Weight GM of the Blues.

jofa 10-03-2003 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jadeddog
on a similar note though, that weight trade sure looks TERRIBLE now doesnt it? i like reasoner and all, but reasoner for weight, not exactly a good deal.


In a round about way though, we also got Stoll and Drouin-Deslauriers in the Weight deal, right? We traded Hecht for a couple 2nd rounders and netted these two, so with the development of Reasoner and the fact that Stoll and Deslauriers are two of our best prospects, it could be just a matter of time before this deal ultimately starts paying some huge dividends for the Oil...

MrMackey 10-03-2003 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jofa
why'd we be without hemsky? i thought it was a second round pick that came over with carter... ?

We also got the option of swapping first rounders. We took Hemsky and Boston took Morrisson.

thome_26 10-03-2003 01:29 PM

See that was silly of Lowe though - Weight didn't have a no trade clause and had no rights which would allow him to say where he could go. Sure he could say, fine I won't sign, but anybody could have said that (Yashin may have said that)! I mean I know the Isles would prefered to do Weight for their first over Yashin for their first, Chara, and a fourthline grinder.

oilers_guy_eddie 10-03-2003 01:33 PM

He didn't say he'd only go to Detroit or St Louis. He said he'd only sign *long term* in Detroit or St Louis. Anywhere else, and he'd have just exercised his right to file for salary arbitration and get a 1 year deal. (or so the story goes.)

Lowetide 10-03-2003 02:44 PM

I think York is the Oilers best all around forward. He's quality wherever he plays, doesn't ***** and moan, gives good effort. Wish we had another just like him.

Vyse64 10-03-2003 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lowetide
I think York is the Oilers best all around forward. He's quality wherever he plays, doesn't ***** and moan, gives good effort. Wish we had another just like him.

its just too bad York wasn't 3-4 inches taller

elphy101 10-03-2003 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jadeddog
one more thing about that weight trade... i personally dont see why we couldnt have traded him to the islanders that year for their pick (and gotten spezza). if they took yashin, you would think they would have taken weight. we might have maybe given them a 2nd rounder as well or something, but it would have been totally worth it..... yes as you can tell im still pretty upset we didnt get more for weight... oh well

Look at it this way. If we offered St. Louis Marty Reasoner, Jarrot Stoll and J.D Deslauriers for Doug Weight. They would jump and the offer. Larry Pleau would be thrilled with that offer. That makes it hard to argue against the trade. It's not like Weight got St. Louis a stanley cup or even close to a stanley cup either.

momentai 10-03-2003 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphy101
Look at it this way. If we offered St. Louis Marty Reasoner, Jarrot Stoll and J.D Deslauriers for Doug Weight. They would jump and the offer. Larry Pleau would be thrilled with that offer. That makes it hard to argue against the trade. It's not like Weight got St. Louis a stanley cup or even close to a stanley cup either.

Bah I still don't think he'd go for it. He probably has his team looking ahead for a chance at the Stanley Cup THIS year. So I think he'd much rather keep Weight as they have a much better shot at it with him than without.

Oi'll say! 10-03-2003 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thor dyck
york had 51 points in the 56 games before his injury. That would be a 75 point season pace while playing on 3 different lines and 8 different players. One thing mact said about sticks in my head (paraphrased)

"whenever a player is struggling, we put him on york's line. York makes his linemates better rather than feeding off them like carter."

IMO, York could really surprise this year. I usually like maguire because he has a real hate on for the leafs but he didn't do his homework this time.

3 different lines with 8 different players and all three forward positions.

I would say that Reasoner was the #1 guy for making his linemates better last season, I think everyone played well with Marty, but York is a close second.

McGuire's observations are very astute most of the time but he was dead wrong on this one.

Mr Sakich 10-03-2003 04:51 PM

for the 100th time:

the deal was not doug weight for reasoner, hecht, and horacek. It was ONE year of doug for 7 years of marty, 7 years of hecht and a lifetime with horachek.

DOug was ufa in a year so his value was extremely lowered. That year, he outscored hecht by 7 points. 7 frickin points cost the blues about 7 million dollars.

Reasoner was our best +/- guy last year, doug was the blue's 2nd worst. He had 7 more non- power play points than marty had with a much worse +/-. A case can be made that marty had a better year than doug did last year while costing 8 million less.

I pay for my tickets. To pay for a 9 mill player, add 12$ to every ticket. IMO, doug is not worth it and the blues can have him.

Mowzie 10-03-2003 11:35 PM

I don't think any trade should be analyzed until every player involved is retired. no one wins or loses a trade until then. eg. The Doug Weight deal looked horrid at first, but in say 5 years, he'll be long retired, and it's very likely that JD Delaurias will be our #1 Goalie, J. Stoll can be our Captain and Marty Reasoner can be a great character guy with decent numbers. we are building for the future right?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:10 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.