View Single Post
Old
08-25-2009, 04:39 PM
  #32
Dread Clawz
Markstrom Rules
 
Dread Clawz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 16,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by J17 Vs Proclamation View Post
Seidenberg is a solid NHL player. A good 3rd pairing Defenseman IMO. How good do you believe Garrison will be? I have never seen myself, i am just going off reports etc. From what i can gather, his max upside is an average 2nd pairing Dman. Thats obviously a best case scenario. The worst case is, obviously, not being an NHL regular.
Yes, your best case is pretty accurate.

Quote:
You are correct, we are not in a position to win. However, the aim at this time is to become a playoff team (rightly or wrongly, i do not believe this core is strong enough to waste 2-3 years on before the next core is cycled in). Seidenberg right now is better than Garrison, and Garrison does not from what i have heard a particularly huge upside. Either way, Florida with Seidenberg or Florida with Garrison doesn't change much in ability to win hockey games.
Not quite sure what you are saying about the core, but I think I disagree. Yes, we are aiming to become a playoff team, but I think we also have to stick to the plan. Once we get to the playoffs, we still need to be building towards something. I don't want us to make the playoffs just to make the playoffs. I don't see much sense in essentially throwing away a good defense prospect who's currently cheaper and 5 years younger than Seidenberg, and who has the potential to become better. Seidenberg isn't our last hope for the playoffs.

Quote:
I don't expect Ballard, McCabe or Allen to be moved, but you never know. Turnover is always fairly high, and it is always hard to forshadow what will happen in a year.
It's not that hard to foreshadow that those 3 will still be here though. In certain cases it is, but not with those 3 players. We just lost our star defenseman. I really don't see any reason why those 3 shouldn't still be here a year from now, unless we are trading one of them for an even better defenseman, in which case you still have the same problem.

Quote:
Injuries are inevitable. Its naive to think injuries won't happen, and with injuries come opportunities.
Yes, injuries will probably happen, but like I said on the last page, last season aside from Allen the highest number of games lost by any defenseman was 14, and some of those weren't even due to injury. Ballard and Bouw both played 82 games. I doubt another d-man misses the entire season again like Allen did, the odds are just against something like that happening two years in a row. And besides, you can't count on people being injured. You have to plan as if they won't.

Quote:
Even if they don't happen. DeBoer and co will choose the best player, regardless of their status, being a vet or a rookie. Signing Seidenberg isn't going to prevent any of the rookies from seeing time if they are good enough.
Yes, it will. For a couple reasons. Firstly, if Seidenberg is playing well, then it's doubtful any of the rookies will beat him out for a spot. That is the problem. Like I said, it's not really a problem this season, but in 2010-11 it could be. When you work in a rookie, you accept that there might be growing pains at first. But you know that it might pay off down the road, that's why you do it. If Seidenberg is blocking the way of a rookie to experience those growing pains, even if they are deemed to be NHL ready, then that's a problem. And even if he's playing mediocre, the problem with signing Seidenberg for 3 years is you don't want to upset him if he's going to be here for that long, it's bad for the lockerroom. So you can't exile him to the pressbox. And he's also going to be making at least 1.5-2M/yr. And if he's sitting in the pressbox at that salary, then that's just retarded.

Quote:
Its not like Ville K, Leopold, Seidenberg are high end Defenseman. If management felt one of the rookies was NHL ready and could the job as well or better, they would replace the other guy im sure. I don't see it as a problem. Inserting rookie Dman into the lineup is IMO easier than offensively minded rookie forwards.
Leopold gets underrated again, wow. No rookie is going to force Leopold out of the lineup, first of all. Koisty might be replaced, but it's doubtful anyone else would be. Anyway, like I said, it's not a problem until 2010-11. If we sign Seidenberg, we'd probably have 8 defensemen all capable of playing top 6 minutes in the NHL. And Garrison and Ellerby would be fed up with playing in the AHL by then. That's where the problem is.

Quote:
Either way, i dont see a problem. The whole nature of our D could be changed by Kulikov anyway.
He won't step in and be a star right away though.

Dread Clawz is offline   Reply With Quote