HFBoards - View Single Post

ruckus* · 03-07-2011, 06:36 PM

My biggest regret is that we didn't trade him for a pick after last season.

For the people who are arguing that all he needs to do is get stronger.....that was what everyone said after last season.

He has no ability to take anyone off the puck in the corners. It's bad enough watching him try to battle third line players for the puck. I can't imagine him playing forward and having to face physical defensemen.

And can someone please explain to me all of this offensive potential he is supposed to have? Where is it? He has no shot. His apparent spectacular skating (which is one of the most overrated things I've ever heard) never creates opportunities, and he's a guy who makes one solid pass a month it seems.

And hoahmaru....you make two points that I really just don't understand.

First, to keep bringing up Redden and Eminger....Now I'm not one to defend Redden, but to blame Gilroy's play last year on being paired with Wade is laughable. It was just as unfortunate for Redden that he had to be paired with Gilroy. I hope you understand that. To honestly believe that Redden wasn't more serviceable than Gilroy is just being blind. Cap hit aside, Wade still made veteran plays and quick passes to get the puck out of the zone. I understand Gilroy was a rookie but he wasn't even capable of those things. He was Wade Redden but worse. And that's not Wade Redden's fault. And to bring Eminger into it? Eminger has been solid this season.

Also, you make a comment referring to the fact that we'll need a 5th or 6th defenseman next year so why not?

Why not? Because it's going to cost us his QO or at the very least more money than it would to put a rookie back there.

I understand the typical response from naysayers about prospects in Hartford playing as rookies next year and how we have no idea how they'll be....but we do know things about them if we've watched them.

I've watched Valentenko a ton and I don't see any way he's going to be worse than Gilroy. He's 100 times as physical and has a bomb of a shot. Those are already two things he brings that Gilroy doesn't. Gilroy brings nothing. He'll be a cheaper AND better option than Gilroy next year. There is ZERO reason to bring this guy back.

The point you make about not having money to address the D is exactly why you let him walk. You give another kid who has earned it a chance next year and use the money to improve other needs. All the while actually upgrading your D for less money.

03-07-2011, 06:36 PM	#64
ruckus* Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: New Jersey Country: Posts: 3,554 vCash: 500	My biggest regret is that we didn't trade him for a pick after last season. For the people who are arguing that all he needs to do is get stronger.....that was what everyone said after last season. He has no ability to take anyone off the puck in the corners. It's bad enough watching him try to battle third line players for the puck. I can't imagine him playing forward and having to face physical defensemen. And can someone please explain to me all of this offensive potential he is supposed to have? Where is it? He has no shot. His apparent spectacular skating (which is one of the most overrated things I've ever heard) never creates opportunities, and he's a guy who makes one solid pass a month it seems. And hoahmaru....you make two points that I really just don't understand. First, to keep bringing up Redden and Eminger....Now I'm not one to defend Redden, but to blame Gilroy's play last year on being paired with Wade is laughable. It was just as unfortunate for Redden that he had to be paired with Gilroy. I hope you understand that. To honestly believe that Redden wasn't more serviceable than Gilroy is just being blind. Cap hit aside, Wade still made veteran plays and quick passes to get the puck out of the zone. I understand Gilroy was a rookie but he wasn't even capable of those things. He was Wade Redden but worse. And that's not Wade Redden's fault. And to bring Eminger into it? Eminger has been solid this season. Also, you make a comment referring to the fact that we'll need a 5th or 6th defenseman next year so why not? Why not? Because it's going to cost us his QO or at the very least more money than it would to put a rookie back there. I understand the typical response from naysayers about prospects in Hartford playing as rookies next year and how we have no idea how they'll be....but we do know things about them if we've watched them. I've watched Valentenko a ton and I don't see any way he's going to be worse than Gilroy. He's 100 times as physical and has a bomb of a shot. Those are already two things he brings that Gilroy doesn't. Gilroy brings nothing. He'll be a cheaper AND better option than Gilroy next year. There is ZERO reason to bring this guy back. The point you make about not having money to address the D is exactly why you let him walk. You give another kid who has earned it a chance next year and use the money to improve other needs. All the while actually upgrading your D for less money.