Not long term they don't. Lombardi offered Gaborik 3 years and he didn't accept, time to move on.
Where did you hear it was three years? Lombardi himself as well as Hextall both said we were only interested in one year deals with Gaborik or Havlat.
__________________
"It has not been a good day. I lost my glasses early this morning and I had to go buy a pair of 79 dollar reading glasses today. 79 bucks. You can literally get them at Costco, three-for-20." - Darryl Sutter's response to going up 2-0 in the series.
Everything I've read on here as well as LGK was a 3 year deal worth 7.5 per.
I remember Lombardi saying 1 as well.
Research time!
That was quick.
He said both:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lombardi
``We were prepared to look at Gaborik, but we were not prepared for a Hossa-type deal. We were talking first about a one(-year contract), then a two or three for Gaborik.
so, got home after a long day and watched the game. overall, i thought it was well-played by both sides. neither team had very many really glaring errors. i'd give the kings an edge in possession of maybe 55-45, but the islanders certainly had their chances. i thought the handzus line had another strong game, as did purcell. it was a very satisfying win, particularly as the way the islanders play, it really demanded discipline and careful play from the kings, and by and large they provided that.
the player i'm really NOT impressed with at the moment is jason williams. sure, he's picked up some points, but he doesn't really seem to be contributing to that line. he's scoring by diffusion through his proximity to kopitar and smyth. what i find surprising about watching him is his lack of quickness in his shots, which is why they're constantly getting blocked, and the real unsteadiness that he seems to have when he gets the puck. he's constantly bobbling or flubbing passes or missing shots. people have commented lately that he's doing the "little things," and i guess that's true. he is playing with a lot of energy. i'm not saying trade him this instant, but ultimately, he does not look like a top-line scoring threat to me. am i alone on this? is he going to get better? does he belong on the top line?
so, got home after a long day and watched the game. overall, i thought it was well-played by both sides. neither team had very many really glaring errors. i'd give the kings an edge in possession of maybe 55-45, but the islanders certainly had their chances. i thought the handzus line had another strong game, as did purcell. it was a very satisfying win, particularly as the way the islanders play, it really demanded discipline and careful play from the kings, and by and large they provided that.
the player i'm really NOT impressed with at the moment is jason williams. sure, he's picked up some points, but he doesn't really seem to be contributing to that line. he's scoring by diffusion through his proximity to kopitar and smyth. what i find surprising about watching him is his lack of quickness in his shots, which is why they're constantly getting blocked, and the real unsteadiness that he seems to have when he gets the puck. he's constantly bobbling or flubbing passes or missing shots. people have commented lately that he's doing the "little things," and i guess that's true. he is playing with a lot of energy. i'm not saying trade him this instant, but ultimately, he does not look like a top-line scoring threat to me. am i alone on this? is he going to get better? does he belong on the top line?
so, got home after a long day and watched the game. overall, i thought it was well-played by both sides. neither team had very many really glaring errors. i'd give the kings an edge in possession of maybe 55-45, but the islanders certainly had their chances. i thought the handzus line had another strong game, as did purcell. it was a very satisfying win, particularly as the way the islanders play, it really demanded discipline and careful play from the kings, and by and large they provided that.
the player i'm really NOT impressed with at the moment is jason williams. sure, he's picked up some points, but he doesn't really seem to be contributing to that line. he's scoring by diffusion through his proximity to kopitar and smyth. what i find surprising about watching him is his lack of quickness in his shots, which is why they're constantly getting blocked, and the real unsteadiness that he seems to have when he gets the puck. he's constantly bobbling or flubbing passes or missing shots. people have commented lately that he's doing the "little things," and i guess that's true. he is playing with a lot of energy. i'm not saying trade him this instant, but ultimately, he does not look like a top-line scoring threat to me. am i alone on this? is he going to get better? does he belong on the top line?
Well based on the other 3 games the Kings won he looked actually pretty good IMO. Today his puckwork didn't seem to work. I would still like to see Brown try out on that first line, or even Purcell who had a very good game today. But it is still early..who knows what could happen..
And I hope Ersberg does get a good chunk of games.
I'm not really opposed at all to Ersberg playing against the Rags, it's just not my first inclination.
We need to come out of those two games with 2 of 4 points. No matter which goalie you put in there, that's probably the end result that's realistic any way you go about it.
Given that NY is playing 3 in 4, playing Quick gives LA a way better than average chance at 2 points in that game, but I also think that Quick has something to prove playing against Detroit and he may shine there. Ersberg is going to play his pads off in either game he starts. He's looking for a #1 gig somewhere and I'm sure he realizes by now it's probably not going to be in LA.
I don't think TM can really go wrong either way... unless they don't get 2 of 4 points.
We need to come out of those two games with 2 of 4 points. No matter which goalie you put in there, that's probably the end result that's realistic any way you go about it.
Given that NY is playing 3 in 4, playing Quick gives LA a way better than average chance at 2 points in that game, but I also think that Quick has something to prove playing against Detroit and he may shine there. Ersberg is going to play his pads off in either game he starts. He's looking for a #1 gig somewhere and I'm sure he realizes by now it's probably not going to be in LA.
I don't think TM can really go wrong either way... unless they don't get 2 of 4 points.
- T
Saying you want 2 out of 4 is giving up one game before you even play it.
Dustin Brown trying to play above his means is a line-killer. Dustin Brown simplifying his game and cracking heads is the one we've grown to love. I'm sure he'll come around soon enough.
Side note--does anyone have any clue what pissed Ivanans and Reichlich (sp) off so much? They were yapping for a good 5 minutes, and it looked like Ivanans was about to rub his nose on the ground...
