HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Tampa Bay Lightning (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=27)
-   -   Lightning sign Janik (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=404540)

Tokala 07-25-2007 10:28 AM

Lightning sign Janik
 
Lightning signed Doug Janik to a 1-year, 2-way deal. He earns $475K with Tampa or $100K with Norfolk.
Lightning sign Janik

Yzerplan 07-25-2007 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tokala (Post 10013616)
Lightning signed Doug Janik to a 1-year, 2-way deal. He earns $475K with Tampa or $100K with Norfolk.
Lightning sign Janik

Well at least this isn't anymore than a depth signing.

OptimismRestrainer 07-25-2007 11:41 AM

I think Janik has alot of potential, I really do. He needs more time to mature. This could end up being a good deal for the Lightning.

Kristia 07-25-2007 11:55 AM

Nice to see him re-sign here....if nothing else we will have some depth this year..:)

randyc 07-25-2007 12:12 PM

It does provide depth
 
I think the Bolts have gone out and obtained some depth defensemen who can possibly come in and contribute to the big club. But for those who don't make the cut in Tampa bodes well for Norfolk.

It will be a fun training camp to watch the competition play out for the one or two available positions on the d.

Also, this will put to rest the thought of having to sign Pratt or Cullimore. I would rather see the Bolts go with what they have in the fold now rather than those two guys.

LastoftheBrunnenG 07-25-2007 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goalie Needed (Post 10014358)
I think Janik has alot of potential, I really do. He needs more time to mature. This could end up being a good deal for the Lightning.

So you like Janik's 27 year old upside, but you don't care for the 22 year old Ranger, who is already superior to Janik in every facet of the game? :yo:

rangerskid16* 07-25-2007 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LastoftheBrunnenG (Post 10015162)
So you like Janik's 27 year old upside, but you don't care for the 22 year old Ranger, who is already superior to Janik in every facet of the game? :yo:

I would perfer a solid but not great janik to play 2nd 3rd line d, then a young inexpiernced player

LastoftheBrunnenG 07-25-2007 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BruinsCup77 (Post 10015178)
I would perfer a solid but not great janik to play 2nd 3rd line d, then a young inexpiernced player

And Ranger has 60 odd more NHL games experience. :teach:

rangerskid16* 07-25-2007 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LastoftheBrunnenG (Post 10015246)
And Ranger has 60 odd more NHL games experience. :teach:

Paul Ranger strugles in front of the net because hes to passive thats not what you need as a 2nd or 3rd line D you can only get away with that if your at brian leetchs talent and doesnt have a dominant quality and still hasnt found his " niche' that was all from tsn.ca

X0X0A0 07-25-2007 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LastoftheBrunnenG (Post 10015162)
So you like Janik's 27 year old upside, but you don't care for the 22 year old Ranger, who is already superior to Janik in every facet of the game? :yo:

You beat me to it.

A two way deal for Janik I am ok with and prefer it to Cullimore.

LastoftheBrunnenG 07-25-2007 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BruinsCup77 (Post 10015308)
Paul Ranger strugles in front of the net because hes to passive thats not what you need as a 2nd or 3rd line D you can only get away with that if your at brian leetchs talent and doesnt have a dominant quality and still hasnt found his " niche' that was all from tsn.ca

And that does nothing to address the experience issue or the fact that Janik doesn't do what you criticize Ranger for not doing, so what is your point?

Hockeyfan02 07-25-2007 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BruinsCup77 (Post 10015308)
Paul Ranger strugles in front of the net because hes to passive thats not what you need as a 2nd or 3rd line D you can only get away with that if your at brian leetchs talent and doesnt have a dominant quality and still hasnt found his " niche' that was all from tsn.ca

Well then why are you talking about Janik being better than Ranger. The next one on one battle that Janik wins will be his first.

Meh on this signing. At least it's a two-way. I really don't like Janik, but as a 7th defenseman he's fine. Just as long as he isn't a regular, I'm ok with it.

Maria 07-25-2007 04:55 PM

I have no problem with Janik, hopefully he improves.

Who's left to sign, Pratt and Craig??

Butchered 07-25-2007 05:38 PM

There is pretty much zero need for Pratt right now. I could honestly care less about Craig at this point. I don't care if he's a future C. Our current C is pretty useless if you ask me.

X0X0A0 07-25-2007 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maria (Post 10017961)
I have no problem with Janik, hopefully he improves.

Who's left to sign, Pratt and Craig??

Hopefully just Craig.

missK 07-25-2007 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BruinsCup77 (Post 10015178)
I would perfer a solid but not great janik to play 2nd 3rd line d, then a young inexpiernced player

But that's the point, Janik is not consistent enough to play 18-20 minutes a night other than as a fill in for an injury. If the coaching staff thought he was capable, he would be playing those type of minutes.

OptimismRestrainer 07-25-2007 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LastoftheBrunnenG (Post 10015162)
So you like Janik's 27 year old upside, but you don't care for the 22 year old Ranger, who is already superior to Janik in every facet of the game? :yo:

Never said I didn't like him. As a matter of fact I said I do like him. What I said was he's not as good as everyone around here seems to think he is. Will he be someday? In my view, no. But that's just me. He is not a 1/2 dman at this point in his career and I don't think anyone can argue that. Janik certainly isn't either but he is a better stay at home guy than Ranger and doesn't blow coverage like Ranger does. Doesn't get his ice time either I know this but to me he seems more disiplined than Ranger. I actually like both of them. So there. And Patrick is just pissed because I slammed his "Ranger is one of the most underated guys in the NHL" comment. He knows better.

LastoftheBrunnenG 07-25-2007 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goalie Needed (Post 10018805)
Never said I didn't like him. As a matter of fact I said I do like him. What I said was he's not as good as everyone around here seems to think he is. Will he be someday? In my view, no. But that's just me. He is not a 1/2 dman at this point in his career and I don't think anyone can argue that. Janik certainly isn't either but he is a better stay at home guy than Ranger and doesn't blow coverage like Ranger does. Doesn't get his ice time either I know this but to me he seems more disiplined than Ranger. I actually like both of them. So there. And Patrick is just pissed because I slammed his "Ranger is one of the most underated guys in the NHL" comment. He knows better.



Quote:

Let's see how many games into the season he can go before he gets benched. Sorry I'm not as excited as everyone else.
That's what you said when he was signed. Obviously, thinking you "don't care for him" if you think he'll be benched quickly is a reasonable assumption.

My original point is still uncommented about. You beleive in the potential of a 27 year old over a 22 year old who is already better. Doesn't Ranger get time to mature? Don't see how you'll spin that one. But good luck.

OptimismRestrainer 07-26-2007 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LastoftheBrunnenG (Post 10020929)
That's what you said when he was signed. Obviously, thinking you "don't care for him" if you think he'll be benched quickly is a reasonable assumption.

My original point is still uncommented about. You beleive in the potential of a 27 year old over a 22 year old who is already better. Doesn't Ranger get time to mature? Don't see how you'll spin that one. But good luck.

Hasn't he been benched in the past? Yea, he has, and more than once. So saying that obviously means I don't like the guy, right? And since it was his coach who benched him, that must mean he doesn't care for him either? Come on man.

Spin what? Of course he gets time to mature as does any young player. All I said was I wasn't calling out the brass bands for his new contract, that's it. You decided to spin it into something it isn't. Nice try. :p:

LastoftheBrunnenG 07-26-2007 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goalie Needed (Post 10028910)
Hasn't he been benched in the past? Yea, he has, and more than once. So saying that obviously means I don't like the guy, right? And since it was his coach who benched him, that must mean he doesn't care for him either? Come on man.

Spin what? Of course he gets time to mature as does any young player. All I said was I wasn't calling out the brass bands for his new contract, that's it. You decided to spin it into something it isn't. Nice try. :p:

That's pretty good spin. I'm not buying it, but nice try. Anyone who goes out of his way to post what you posted is either got an axe to grind or WAY too much time on his hands. If it's the later, it's like calling up one of 1-900 poll questions and answering "I don't know" or "no opinion". I mean, why bother? So you don't care he got signed? But you took the time to tell everyone..."I don't care." Thanks for nothing. I find that hard to beleive and think you were taking your usual pot shot at Ranger. But when the indomitable Doug Janik is signed! Woo Hoo!!!

Janik's 27 and Ranger is 22, yet you get excited by Janiks potential and signing and yet rain on Rangers parade, not that anyone was trying to plan one. Anything else is spin by default. Unless 27 is 5 years younger than 22. Or Janik is suddenly better than Ranger.

I'm going to Cooperstown this weekend, but I eagerly look forward to your response about a player you don't really care about when I get back. :p:

DOUG JANIK FOREVER!!!

&

PEACE OUT!!!

OptimismRestrainer 07-26-2007 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LastoftheBrunnenG (Post 10030802)
That's pretty good spin. I'm not buying it, but nice try. Anyone who goes out of his way to post what you posted is either got an axe to grind or WAY too much time on his hands. If it's the later, it's like calling up one of 1-900 poll questions and answering "I don't know" or "no opinion". I mean, why bother? So you don't care he got signed? But you took the time to tell everyone..."I don't care." Thanks for nothing. I find that hard to beleive and think you were taking your usual pot shot at Ranger. But when the indomitable Doug Janik is signed! Woo Hoo!!!

Janik's 27 and Ranger is 22, yet you get excited by Janiks potential and signing and yet rain on Rangers parade, not that anyone was trying to plan one. Anything else is spin by default. Unless 27 is 5 years younger than 22. Or Janik is suddenly better than Ranger.

I'm going to Cooperstown this weekend, but I eagerly look forward to your response about a player you don't really care about when I get back. :p:

DOUG JANIK FOREVER!!!

&

PEACE OUT!!!


Wow. You've managed to blow everything I've said completely out of proportion. Talk about too much time on your hands. Wow. :shakehead

Tell Pete Rose I said hi.

avsfan6* 07-27-2007 03:51 PM

ranger>>>janik ranger is a top four d man.....one day maybe a top 2 at his peak.......janik reserve d man maybe top 6 at his peak i think most will agree no?

OptimismRestrainer 07-28-2007 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avsfan6 (Post 10039639)
ranger>>>janik ranger is a top four d man.....one day maybe a top 2 at his peak.......janik reserve d man maybe top 6 at his peak i think most will agree no?

Thanks.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:42 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.