HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Nashville Predators (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=33)
-   -   Option c..or d...or z (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=540063)

echlfreak 07-29-2008 12:40 PM

Option c..or d...or z
 
Parrish put on waivers today...thoughts???

Worstfaceoffmanuver we know your answer is no, because you are the eternal optimist that our young guys are going to be stars...so don't worry about responding.

Seth Lake 07-29-2008 12:53 PM

No! Can't fill a top-six role. 3 years remaining on his contract at 2+ million per. Would block one of our younger guys from taking a bottom six role and growing from there.

Honestly, how did I guess that as soon as I saw that Parrish was on waivers that you would be making a post, much less an entire thread, on picking him up???

Enoch 07-29-2008 12:59 PM

I liked Parrish once upon a time, but even then, he was a fringe top 6 forward. If he is bought out, I wouldn't be adverse to giving a 1-2 year deal on our terms, but I do not see the point in picking him up at what he is owed. Frankly, in this instance, the kids would probably be just as good at a scoring role....

crossxcheck 07-29-2008 03:32 PM

for that money and contract, I'd rather just try out one of the young guys we have.

worstfaceoffmanever 07-29-2008 06:48 PM

Wouldn't claim him off waivers but if we can sign him to a deal afterwards, I'd be more than willing to give him a shot. Maybe let him come into camp unsigned. It worked for Yanic Perreault.

echlfreak 07-30-2008 11:45 PM

Preds express interest in Parrish as per the Tennessean today...signs that times are at least shifting, not yet changing

worstfaceoffmanever 07-30-2008 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by echlfreak (Post 15036168)
Preds express interest in Parrish as per the Tennessean today...signs that times are at least shifting, not yet changing

Hallelujah, some kind of news!

TBFan 07-31-2008 10:22 AM

He would be a good pickup and would definetly be a top 6 player on this team right now. Be curious at what price he can be had since being bought out.

DontCallPlayersStuds 07-31-2008 11:43 AM

i actually do think he woudl be a good fit here. since hartnell left, we've had no one to shovel in garbage...which we are actually pretty decent at creating. he's a one trick pony in that regard, but it's a trick that would be useful to us.

Enoch 07-31-2008 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrytrotzsneck (Post 15040392)
i actually do think he woudl be a good fit here. since hartnell left, we've had no one to shovel in garbage...which we are actually pretty decent at creating. he's a one trick pony in that regard, but it's a trick that would be useful to us.

Especially with Legwand's speed and Erat/Leggy's playmaking ability. He would slot in well on that line IMO.

echlfreak 07-31-2008 01:25 PM

having a top 6 group of

Arnott, Dumont, Legwand, Erat, Parrish and Hornqvist might even be an improvement from last years top 6. When you take away Zidlicky and Radulov, yes you lose goals and offense but the d-zone improves dramatically. Hornqvist should be able to put up decent numbers and Parrish should be able to make a little improvement by playing on a first or second line and in a less defensive system.

Additional skill depth with Jones, Philstrom, Tootoo, Fiddler.

With this addition I think most fans would feel a lot more comfortable entering the season

Jarnberg 07-31-2008 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by echlfreak (Post 15041891)
having a top 6 group of

Arnott, Dumont, Legwand, Erat, Parrish and Hornqvist might even be an improvement from last years top 6. When you take away Zidlicky and Radulov, yes you lose goals and offense but the d-zone improves dramatically. Hornqvist should be able to put up decent numbers and Parrish should be able to make a little improvement by playing on a first or second line and in a less defensive system.

Additional skill depth with Jones, Philstrom, Tootoo, Fiddler.

With this addition I think most fans would feel a lot more comfortable entering the season

How is our "d-zone" improved dramatically again?

a79krgm 07-31-2008 01:30 PM

Parrish had on off season last year. His injuries along with the birth of his first child were major distractions. I think he's good for 20 goals if given the chance. If he can be signed for under 1MM then he would be a bargain for any team.

Enoch 07-31-2008 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stranger (Post 15041913)
How is our "d-zone" improved dramatically again?

I'm not trying to answer for echl, but our defensive zone should improve simply by having an in-shape/healthy Weber and another year of experience under the belts of our young blueline.

Jarnberg 07-31-2008 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch (Post 15042026)
I'm not trying to answer for echl, but our defensive zone should improve simply by having an in-shape/healthy Weber and another year of experience under the belts of our young blueline.

But dramatically?

echlfreak 07-31-2008 02:16 PM

Enoch I appreciate the help, but to clarify my comment regarding the d-zone.

Radulov with the exception of Bonk was our worst defensively responsible forwards, he was often a turnover machine, he rarely dumped the puck and had tunnel vision when he carried the puck. So by adding a veteran guy like Parrish who has played within a defense first system the last two years that improves a lot in one area.

Zidlicky, great offensive mindset but it is pretty hard to play defense when you are below the offensive goal line. Replacing him with VK (our top +/- player) or Klein then you improve the d-end. Also with the addition of a healthy Weber.

When you lose two of your top defensive liabilities and replace them with stronger d-zone players-I think that is a dramatic improvement. But, thats just me.

predhead1 07-31-2008 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stranger (Post 15042062)
But dramatically?

Radulov and Zids were both known as less than capable in our end, but I agree, I don't expect dramatic improvement solely by virtue of replacing them with others. The biggest changes will be as a result of another year of experience for Weber, Suter, Hammy.

Jarnberg 07-31-2008 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by echlfreak (Post 15042634)
Radulov with the exception of Bonk was our worst defensively responsible forwards, he was often a turnover machine, he rarely dumped the puck and had tunnel vision when he carried the puck.

Radulov was not a defensive minded player, no doubt about it. Not that we needed him to be of course.

Quote:

Zidlicky, great offensive mindset but it is pretty hard to play defense when you are below the offensive goal line. Replacing him with VK (our top +/- player) or Klein then you improve the d-end.
Zidlicky's defensive liabilities are becoming grossly overstated.

Quote:

When you lose two of your top defensive liabilities and replace them with stronger d-zone players-I think that is a dramatic improvement. But, thats just me.
But we also lose offensive pressure, which in turns creates more pressure on our defense.

We will probably be a bit better in our defensive zone, but I think it is a stretch to say that we will be dramatically better. And at what cost?

worstfaceoffmanever 07-31-2008 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by echlfreak (Post 15042634)
Radulov with the exception of Bonk was our worst defensively responsible forwards,

What game were you watching? Bonk was one of our top defensive forwards. That's why he was out there against the other team's top lines every night. He's our Sammy Pahlsson.

triggrman 07-31-2008 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by worstfaceoffmanever (Post 15046267)
What game were you watching? Bonk was one of our top defensive forwards. That's why he was out there against the other team's top lines every night. He's our Sammy Pahlsson.

That's what they billed him as, a great defensive forward but he was far from that, imho, he's not even in Legwand's league defensively.

echlfreak 07-31-2008 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by worstfaceoffmanever (Post 15046267)
What game were you watching? Bonk was one of our top defensive forwards. That's why he was out there against the other team's top lines every night. He's our Sammy Pahlsson.

Bonk was -31 what is your comeback to that Worstfaceoffmanuver??? Is that a TOP defensive forward? -10 I can understand but -31 wow!!! That is with his 14 goals that he got plus' for, which means he was on the ice for at LEAST 45 goals against minimum...add the totals of his line mates and you are close to 60 goals against that he was on the ice for

Worstfaceoffmanuver, I have looked at your comments for weeks now and you are the eternal optimist that our young kids are going to be studs, that Bonk is a great def fwd, among other totally off base comments. And, I have come to realize that you have no clue about hockey. But, it is fun to listen to your stuff.

worstfaceoffmanever 07-31-2008 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by echlfreak (Post 15047590)
Bonk was -31 what is your comeback to that Worstfaceoffmanuver??? Is that a TOP defensive forward? -10 I can understand but -31 wow!!! That is with his 14 goals that he got plus' for, which means he was on the ice for at LEAST 45 goals against minimum...add the totals of his line mates and you are close to 60 goals against that he was on the ice for

Well let's look at a few things here:

1. What Bonk was going up against. Bonk was billed as our Sammy Pahlsson and used in that capacity, for the most part. He was going up against first lines all across the league every night. We're talking Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Kariya, Patrick Kane, Rick Nash... that's a lot of offensive talent to go up against, and that's just in our own division. Going up against Datsyuk and Zetterberg 8 times a year definitely can't help your plus-minus (Bonk was a -6 in 27 games against the Central).
2. Plus-minus isn't exactly a good barometer for defensive ability, because you can get a minus from somebody else's mistake (for example, a Zanon turnover that leads to a Minnesota goal), or from a complete fluke- Cal O'Reilly once got a minus because a puck hit the shaft of his stick and went in the net. A lot of his bigger minus efforts are as much the responsibility of inconsistent defensemen and goaltenders as it is his defensive play. Also, I think it's worth noting that Bonk had four games at -3, where we played like complete crap defensively: a 6-0 loss to LA on 10/23, a 4-3 loss to Minnesota on 11/24, a 6-5 win over Ottawa on 11/29, and an 8-4 loss to Buffalo on 2/27. Those were collectively poor defensive efforts. Take out those four games and Bonk is a -19.
3. Bonk's inability to compensate offensively. If you look at his numbers, 11 of his 14 goals game before January 1st, and on 12/29 he had a foot injury that bugged him the rest of the year and had to wear a boot for most, if not all of the remainder of the season. I think that foot injury was bugging him a lot more than the organization let on. His lack of high-quality offensive linemates (Smithson, Ortmeyer, Fiddler, and Peverley mostly) also hurt his ability to produce and compensate. If we have a deeper team and can give him better linemates, Bonk's plus-minus is nowhere near that -31.

nine_inch_fang 08-01-2008 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stranger (Post 15042980)
Radulov was not a defensive minded player, no doubt about it. Not that we needed him to be of course.

Defensive minded....no but defensively aware would have been good.

Zidlicky's defensive liabilities are becoming grossly overstated.

Not that I disagree with you but this made me laugh coming from a....let's say slightly hyperbolic poster.

But we also lose offensive pressure, which in turns creates more pressure on our defense.

I don't think we'll lose any of our offensive pressure this year. Actually I think we might be better with Horn and a Parrish type in the top six.


We will probably be a bit better in our defensive zone, but I think it is a stretch to say that we will be dramatically better. And at what cost?

Personally I think or improvement on defense just may come close to drastically. I won't act like anyone that disagrees is totally wrong though.

Jarnberg 08-01-2008 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by worstfaceoffmanever (Post 15048112)
Well let's look at a few things here:

1. What Bonk was going up against. Bonk was billed as our Sammy Pahlsson and used in that capacity, for the most part. He was going up against first lines all across the league every night. We're talking Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Kariya, Patrick Kane, Rick Nash... that's a lot of offensive talent to go up against, and that's just in our own division. Going up against Datsyuk and Zetterberg 8 times a year definitely can't help your plus-minus (Bonk was a -6 in 27 games against the Central).
2. Plus-minus isn't exactly a good barometer for defensive ability, because you can get a minus from somebody else's mistake (for example, a Zanon turnover that leads to a Minnesota goal), or from a complete fluke- Cal O'Reilly once got a minus because a puck hit the shaft of his stick and went in the net. A lot of his bigger minus efforts are as much the responsibility of inconsistent defensemen and goaltenders as it is his defensive play. Also, I think it's worth noting that Bonk had four games at -3, where we played like complete crap defensively: a 6-0 loss to LA on 10/23, a 4-3 loss to Minnesota on 11/24, a 6-5 win over Ottawa on 11/29, and an 8-4 loss to Buffalo on 2/27. Those were collectively poor defensive efforts. Take out those four games and Bonk is a -19.
3. Bonk's inability to compensate offensively. If you look at his numbers, 11 of his 14 goals game before January 1st, and on 12/29 he had a foot injury that bugged him the rest of the year and had to wear a boot for most, if not all of the remainder of the season. I think that foot injury was bugging him a lot more than the organization let on. His lack of high-quality offensive linemates (Smithson, Ortmeyer, Fiddler, and Peverley mostly) also hurt his ability to produce and compensate. If we have a deeper team and can give him better linemates, Bonk's plus-minus is nowhere near that -31.

I don't remember Bonk going up against other team's first lines every night last year...

triggrman 08-01-2008 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stranger (Post 15049856)
I don't remember Bonk going up against other team's first lines every night last year...

me either and he wasn't much on penalty killing either with only 12 seconds a game on the kill.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:34 AM.

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.