Thread: Value of: Scott Harrington
View Single Post
Old
01-08-2013, 01:02 AM
  #52
Warm Cookies
firekunitzintosun
 
Warm Cookies's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 49,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
He is not a hitter. It is not his style.
TR, unless you classify Niskanen as a hitter, that's clearly not the point I was making. The numbers simply don't support your argument for Hamhuis on that front, even if he lays a nice hipcheck now and then.

Quote:
Me and bruinsfan46 are not merely projecting on one aspect of Harrington's tool box. Neither are you when comparing Harrington with players playing a similar brand of D WHILE having other valuable qualities Harrington does not. If they didn't have those additional qualities, they wouldn't be the assets they are.
Btw. Gorges only became a real asset in a value sense after ROCKING with Gill as the Habs booted us and the Caps. Ie. after he had been playing in the NHL for three full seasons and developed to an NHL shutdown D-man.
Production is not a tool though. I don't agree that the defensemen I named possess standout tools - at least defensively - that Harrington doesn't (though Girardi is obviously a more prolific hitter).

Quote:
I believe our PK was top3 in the league all of last season, until our system imploded/was obliterated against Philly.
I also believe that our most hated on D-men had always been excellent PK'ers with their previous teams and were so, predominantly, for us as well. Will be so going forward also, most likely.
It was not the individual quality of our PK'ers that got stood up. Philly just had us figured out and executed splendidly, Bylsma never made any adjustments to what was obviously killing us and MAF was Swiss cheese to boot. Debacle? Oh boy, yes!
1. Michalek, our #1 PK defenseman, has been traded.

2. We were 2nd worst on the PK in the playoffs in 2011, and the very worst in 2012. However good we were in the regular season, if they can't get the job done in the playoffs, it needs to be addressed. I am not confident in the likes of Martin and Orpik on the PK when it matters.

Quote:
I like St.Louis, L.A, Vancouver, San Jose and arguably Boston as better D from a player by player point of view.
I disagree, but bottom line, they're in the discussion for top 5 defense no matter how you slice it. It's a huge strength, not what hindered them in the playoffs.

Quote:
There is for Harrington and anyone currently seen as a D-prospect within our organization.
Man, these defense spots have not been grabbed by youngsters yet - that's what I'm getting at. Once they have, you can argue that there's too much youth. Until they have, we're not a young blueline, so the concerns are unfounded.

Quote:
Because they're the only assets we have to trade. Whether it is Harrington or someone else. I am no more gung ho on dealing Harrington than I am on dealing Pouliot or Dumoulin for instance. I just opine that neither of them are important for us, although one day of course they could be if they are the ones making it through.
They're not. We happen to have a couple overpaid, underperforming veterans on the blueline whose experience and track record could still yield a solid return. I'd cut bait with either of them before trading Harrington.

Quote:
I don't see why a Dumoulin for instance projects to be inferior to Harrington. But again, I would have no problems dealing any of them.... but would want serious returns for guys like Despres and Morrow.
Dumoulin's solid too, but I think Harrington's defensive ability is truly special. I rated him as the 3rd best defense prospect we had in our pre-season prospect rankings, and I've gone out of my way to watch him as often as anyone outside London can the last couple years.

If it would take a "serious return" for Despres or Morrow, I'm assuming it would take something less than that for you to deal Harrington. What player(s) would make it worthwhile for you?

Quote:
Yes, in the D-group there are many. Again, I care less about which ones among the D-men we end up trading. I am not arguing that we should deal Harrington, only that I don't see how he is particularly important to hang on to.
We are going to have to get someone ready-made/NHL potty trained to complement the youth infusion too at some point though, and I don't care whether such a player takes the role of Harrison, Despres or whoever. We are in a win now mode after all... and young D-cores don't translate well with that.
Harrington is simply a player you win with - a smart, smothering, shutdown defenseman with leadership and character, which is why coaches at every level rave about him. Considering we don't have a single defenseman like that on our current blueline and got embarrassed in our own end last year, I'd say it's a priority.

He's made a habit of leapfrogging more highly-regarded players and excelling in his role, so I think it would be a mistake to lose him. He could end up becoming a reliable NHL player sooner than you think.

Warm Cookies is offline   Reply With Quote