HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Arizona Coyotes (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=40)
-   -   Taffe en fuego (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=20659)

Greg 10-17-2003 04:42 PM

Taffe en fuego
 
Player of the week last week and already has a goal and two assists in tonight's game.

TaffeFan 10-17-2003 04:52 PM

i think they need to make room for him in phoenix

Matzel 10-17-2003 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TaffeFan
i think they need to make room for him in phoenix

Yes, or they let him tear up the 'A' and next year he'll be all the better, because he logged tons of ice time this year and gained valuable experience and confidence. (see also Ottawa and Jason Spezza in 2002/'03)

Dancin' Gabe rules! :bow:

CoyoteBaloney 10-17-2003 08:47 PM

In any other year I would agree that you have to make room for him, but most likely there is no NHL season next year. So then what do you with him? Let him sit out at least a year and not play or develop?

hbk 10-18-2003 04:23 AM

some interesting articles/developments in Canadian media about the status of negotiations.

The reason the Canadian teams are not as vocal about their budgets this year is the status of the Canadian dollar. Since they set their budgets last year, the Canadian dollar has increased in value by approximately 10%. For a team with a $50 million dollar payroll, these teams all of a sudden have an "extra" $5 million of cap room. A team like the Vancouver Canucks can all of a sudden afford a star player at the trade deadline. I wouldn't be surprised to see the dollar continue its upward spiral especially with the upcoming change in the country's leadership. Expect Ottawa and Vancouver to make a serious charge this year.

Ownership apparently turned down an offer from the NHLPA where every player in the league would take a 5% pay cut. It's an opening salvo that at the surface indicates the union is serious about making concessions. A good sign considering there is a year of negotiating to do. Factoring 20 players/ team and an average salary of 1.7 million US that is a minimum cost saving for the league of $51 million.

eye 10-18-2003 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hbk
some interesting articles/developments in Canadian media about the status of negotiations.

The reason the Canadian teams are not as vocal about their budgets this year is the status of the Canadian dollar. Since they set their budgets last year, the Canadian dollar has increased in value by approximately 10%. For a team with a $50 million dollar payroll, these teams all of a sudden have an "extra" $5 million of cap room. A team like the Vancouver Canucks can all of a sudden afford a star player at the trade deadline. I wouldn't be surprised to see the dollar continue its upward spiral especially with the upcoming change in the country's leadership. Expect Ottawa and Vancouver to make a serious charge this year.

Ownership apparently turned down an offer from the NHLPA where every player in the league would take a 5% pay cut. It's an opening salvo that at the surface indicates the union is serious about making concessions. A good sign considering there is a year of negotiating to do. Factoring 20 players/ team and an average salary of 1.7 million US that is a minimum cost saving for the league of $51 million.

Non- NHL hockey style related topic

hbk - actually the dollar has jumped from a low in the 62 cent range 15 months ago to the 75 cent range now. A US dollar was worth a $1.60 Cdn. at the summer of 2002 and now is worth between $1.35 and $1.39. A 50 million dollar payroll cost Cdn. teams about 80 million just 15 months ago where as now it only cost app. 68 million about 15%. Add to that the savings in accomodation, per diem and travel expenses and Cdn. teams have made significant gains of late. Still the Leafs saw fit to raise ticket prices and reduce payroll this year. Maybe we will see the Coyotes move into our new downtown arena in the Peg if the USD keeps slipping. lol. I do agree with you though that there are some encouraging signs for the CBA to be resolved. Personally for the reasons already provided I would like to see a work stoppage so that the WHA can at least have an opportunity to bring excitement and the game back to the fans as they advertise.

Waldo 10-18-2003 07:37 AM

Force the Issue
 
There may be no choice but to bring Taffe up if keeps playing like that. Sooner or later they'll need him because of injuries. If they're primarily interested in winning and have a prospect dominating the AHL then they have to find out if he can do it in the NHL. He'll get a call at some point anyway. If he keeps it up good things will happen. But it's only been a few games. He has been impressive, though, and Springfield is winning games because of him ..............

CoyoteBaloney 10-18-2003 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eye
...

I thought you were no longer an NHL fan? Why would an NCAA fan have any say regarding the NHLPA/NHL talks? :dunno:

CoyoteBaloney 10-18-2003 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Waldo
There may be no choice but to bring Taffe up if keeps playing like that. Sooner or later they'll need him because of injuries. If they're primarily interested in winning and have a prospect dominating the AHL then they have to find out if he can do it in the NHL. He'll get a call at some point anyway. If he keeps it up good things will happen. But it's only been a few games. He has been impressive, though, and Springfield is winning games because of him ..............

I agree. Taffe is forcing the Coyotes to take notice of him. I still think the Coyotes are committed to keeping their future in Springfield until the CBA is cleared up, if the team gets into some kind of prolonged scoring drought that costs the team points in the standings Taffe just may have to to be recalled.

Mark O 10-19-2003 07:29 PM

While Taffe is playing very well offensively, he has to learn to stay out of the penalty box. Saturday night he got called for a penalty behind the play and shortly thereafter Providence scored what proved to be the game winning goal. Too many stupid penalties.

nordique 10-21-2003 05:52 AM

It's not as if the Coyotes have so much scoring talent they have no use for Taffe. Bring him up and let Gratton slide down a line.

Dancing Chicken 10-21-2003 07:20 AM

That would put Chris on the 4th line.. LOL he would not be happy

CoyoteBaloney 10-21-2003 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nordique
It's not as if the Coyotes have so much scoring talent they have no use for Taffe. Bring him up and let Gratton slide down a line.

True, but this year is not what the frasnchise has hoped for with or without Taffe. The Franchise is hoping to be able to compete on equal ground ... meaning after the new CBA is agreed upon. Why bring up Taffe ina year where you won't make it out of the first round only to have him sit out of any hockey playing at all next year?

Guest 10-21-2003 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoyoteTony
True, but this year is not what the frasnchise has hoped for with or without Taffe. The Franchise is hoping to be able to compete on equal ground ... meaning after the new CBA is agreed upon. Why bring up Taffe ina year where you won't make it out of the first round only to have him sit out of any hockey playing at all next year?

I completely agree with your strategy, and perhaps the strategy of the team, but it does get blindsided by Spiller playing this year.

Unless they only play on playing Spiller in Phoenix for 3/4 of the season and sending him to Springfield for a good playoff opportunity should the Coyotes not be in one themselves.

I'm unsure of how the CBA affects players eligible for the minors though. For example, if Spiller plays all year in Phoenix, he'll still be eligible for the minors without waivers, but does that mean he is part of the lockout?

ulf 10-21-2003 11:18 AM

are 2way contracts able to spend this year up and next year in the "a"

what determines eligibility or better yet non elegibility for players to play in the "a" next year.

the spiller situation also confused me ...yet he could still be sent down before he plays a certain # of games?

would it have been poss to have signed spiller to a 2 way contract making him elegible for the "a" later this year or all of next[sneakier things have been done]

Guest 10-21-2003 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ulf
are 2way contracts able to spend this year up and next year in the "a"

what determines eligibility or better yet non elegibility for players to play in the "a" next year.

the spiller situation also confused me ...yet he could still be sent down before he plays a certain # of games?

would it have been poss to have signed spiller to a 2 way contract making him elegible for the "a" later this year or all of next[sneakier things have been done]

All rookies entering the league are on a two-way contract. Some players even continue to be on a two-way contract past their rookie deal (Bierk).

Players eligible for the "A" without waivers are set by an NHL standard. Basically your age versus your NHL experience allows you to be exempt from waivers or not. An example of some of our players who are waivers exempt would be players who were not protected nor exposed in this years waiver draft. Everyone you see on the lists was eligible to waivers.

I think they are going to play Spiller the majority of the year, and then let him go to Springfield in the nick of time. The same would be logical for all of our prospects. Kolanos was the only active roster player that would have been affected to start the season, but once he played the first game of the season, he lost his waivers exemption.

hbk 10-21-2003 01:36 PM

I'll be surprised if Phoenix doesn't send Spiller down once Sillinger returns from injury. somebody has to go down and it is either he or Cleary.

Hordichuk_24 10-21-2003 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hbk
I'll be surprised if Phoenix doesn't send Spiller down once Sillinger returns from injury. somebody has to go down and it is either he or Cleary.

If Spiller is only going to play a few minutes a game like he has all season long, he might as well be sent down to get some quality playing time.

ulf 10-21-2003 02:35 PM

thx gocoyotes

spiller should be down getting experience

so a 2way deal has no bearing on the eligibility, because the waiver rules override it.

what players in springfield can come up and for how long this year,considering that the mgmt stategy seems to be leave everyone possible in the "a" till the cba is resolved.

as posted some time ago,it makes me wonder what roster yotes will become available at the trade deadline this year as 2 yrs from now the yotes seem to be focusing on a crop of 4-5 players nhl ready by that time.

will this roster dump be league wide among the non playoff contenders and what return will be expected?

scoob4093 10-21-2003 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Waldo
There may be no choice but to bring Taffe up if keeps playing like that. Sooner or later they'll need him because of injuries. If they're primarily interested in winning and have a prospect dominating the AHL then they have to find out if he can do it in the NHL. He'll get a call at some point anyway. If he keeps it up good things will happen. But it's only been a few games. He has been impressive, though, and Springfield is winning games because of him ..............



Most of his goals have come on the PP. The Falcons are 2-2. I believe he is minus -2 on the season. He is a gifted offensive player who plays zero attention to his own end of the ice. As a center he is responsible for both ends of the ice. Many here feel that he is only here to score and impress the Yotes with his stats and could not care less about the defensive end of the game and whether his team wins or loses.

ulf 10-21-2003 03:24 PM

not an encouraging analysis of mr.taffe

hopefully he see's the error of his ways and progressess as the year wears on.

CoyoteBaloney 10-21-2003 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hbk
I'll be surprised if Phoenix doesn't send Spiller down once Sillinger returns from injury. somebody has to go down and it is either he or Cleary.

Spiller has been used only sparingly. He needs ice time in all situations to continue his development. He should be sent down. Having him on the Coyotes roster and not getting over 10:00 of ice time is not good for him.

hbk 10-21-2003 04:37 PM

having Spiller up for the beginning of the season to see first hand the speed and strength he'll need to play 20 minutes per game is a good thing. However eventually he's going to need the opportunity to develop a skill set which will allow him to do so. If he's sent down now he's got a truckload of confidence with him. If we wait too long he could get embarassed in the NHL and come to the AHL a mentally beaten man.

gibber1600 10-21-2003 07:37 PM

I thought we were talking about Taffe?

Chris L 10-22-2003 01:13 AM

I agree that it doesn't make sense to keep Spiller up if he plays less than 10 minutes per game. He would be very helpful in Springfield given the Falcons defensive problems and could log tons of ice time there which would be much better for his developpment.

As for Taffe, he will be obviously the 1st forward call-up when needed.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:43 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.