Tangradi's next contract
View Single Post
05-15-2012, 11:25 PM
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Originally Posted by
Disagree. Sullivan did wonders for our powerplay and Tangradi had no business playing anywhere where Sullivan did. I will grant you Park, but isn't Shero the GM?
I actually would like to have Sullivan back. Let the flaming begin. If anybody needs me, I will be under my bed!
I don't think Sullivan was bad this year, and was pretty good a lot of the time. But he was rarely "great", and in the playoffs it was clear he was a weak link. I see no reason to believe that will be any different for a 38 year old Sullivan next year.
The way I see it, there were 3 really weak links in the chain of our team in that playoffs that -- if we improved those spots -- could really strengthen the group as a whole. Those 3 players were Sullivan & Adams up front, and Martin on the back end.
What is also clear from both the discussions on this board (and rightfully so) and from an asset management point of view is that there are 2 forwards who really need to be given a chance: Tangradi & Jeffrey.
So I see very clearly that Tangradi & Jeffrey replace Sullivan & Adams. If Tangradi is playing better, then he gets more time on the top 2 lines; if Jeffrey is, then he gets the spot. There's the internal competition you want, but also the versatility to move guys up & down the line-up and experiment with chemistry. Both guys should see 2nd unit PP time, and Jeffrey has great upside as a penalty-killer.
So, problem with Tangradi (and Jeffrey) is nicely solved there.
Then, on the back end, to replace Martin's weak link is some 2-out of-3 combination of Bortuzzo, Strait, and perhaps Despres, with the possible option of dressing 7 Dmen. Doing that and getting rid of Martin's contract gives us all the money we need to sign Staal. Wam, bam, thank you Shero.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by jmelm