With the cap possibly going to $59 million and Kovy's play in the post-season for the Devils, him coming to the Rangers may be more of a reality. He should get $8 million over 8 years. He can't lead a team to victory by himself, it seems at least. Playing on a team with a goal-scorer like Gaborik will take some of the pressure of him and I think he will be very successful here, especially if he won't be playing against the other teams best shut-down line for parts of the game.
If the cap does indeed go up to somewhere in the $59 million range, the addition of Kovy, Volchenkov, MZA, Hedberg, and may be a solid #5-6 D-man vet could turn this team around big time.
I say a vet #5-6 D-man because I see Sangs and/or Gilroy being dealt at the draft.
That is a solid team up and down the line-up and could very well fit under a $59 million salary cap.
Get rid of the Volchenkov acquisition and I'm 100% on board (although putting MZA on the second line is a bit presumptuous, I'd be more comfortable with Callahan there).
Volchenkov is just going to end up a very, very bad buy for some team, and on a long term deal.
Get rid of the Volchenkov acquisition and I'm 100% on board (although putting MZA on the second line is a bit presumptuous, I'd be more comfortable with Callahan there).
Volchenkov is just going to end up a very, very bad buy for some team, and on a long term deal.
Agreed. Don't pay up in the open market for a Dman who brings 15 points a year.
Right, but in no world is Nylander a #1 on his own merits. He was a decent #2 who happened to have good Chemistry with a dominant Jagr. We could easily see Anisimov or Stepan develop into a similar, or frankly better, player than Nylander.
Excellent post. A #1C is not the black-letter requirement that some posters seem to think it is.
Compare Nylander with Jagr to Nylander without Jagr. Nylander was far from a #1C... he was a secondary complement to an elite winger.
Gaborik and Kovalchuk can do similar for their own centermen.
Get rid of the Volchenkov acquisition and I'm 100% on board (although putting MZA on the second line is a bit presumptuous, I'd be more comfortable with Callahan there).
Volchenkov is just going to end up a very, very bad buy for some team, and on a long term deal.
Yeah, Callahan and MZA are interchangeable imo, I just have a dream 3rd line of Avery-Drury-Callahan. That could be one of the best 3rd lines/shutdown lines in the game.
Yeah, Callahan and MZA are interchangeable imo, I just have a dream 3rd line of Avery-Drury-Callahan. That could be one of the best 3rd lines/shutdown lines in the game.
I actually think Kovalchuk might make Drury a respectable offensive player, and Drury + Callahan would hide Kovalchuk's defensive shortcomings. Worth a try, at least to start.
It also puts less pressure on Anisimov and allows him to continue to develop at his own pace.
Kovalchuk likes to carry the puck (far more than Gaborik) and shoots first passes second...
Drury goes to the net, but the only way he can carry a puck is if he puts one in his hockey bag...
I actually think Kovalchuk might make Drury a respectable offensive player, and Drury + Callahan would hide Kovalchuk's defensive shortcomings. Worth a try, at least to start.
It also puts less pressure on Anisimov and allows him to continue to develop at his own pace.
Kovalchuk likes to carry the puck (far more than Gaborik) and shoots first passes second...
Drury goes to the net, but the only way he can carry a puck is if he puts one in his hockey bag...
Good line-up there as well, and the 3rd line could be nicknamed the "Triple A's" (I know MZA's last name is hyphinated or however it's spelt, but it works! lol) or "The Flying Ace's". lol
Volchenkov may only get 15 points a year, but he'll prevent many more going against us than Redden and Rozsival, COMBINED.
Lets not set the bar as low as "better than Redden". Volchenkov will be massively overpaid for his services and hasn't been able to stay healthy for an entire season due to the way he plays. Not the type of player I would want to tie up 4.5-5 million/year in.
Volchenkov may only get 15 points a year, but he'll prevent many more going against us than Redden and Rozsival, COMBINED.
I get it, people are desperate for a tough, physical defenseman. However, keeping the puck out of our net was the problem far, far less than putting the puck in the other net. We were 10th in GA/G with Redden, and with DZ and Gilroy as rookies.
Cap space is a finite resource, invest what we have in the area that actually needs the most improvement, goal scoring. Investing in a d-man like Volchenkov when you already have Staal (and Girardi to a lesser extent) and Lundqvist in net, is a terrible investment. You're going to have diminishing marginal return.
Volchenkov will be a terrible investment for whatever team signs him, because he's going to get ~$5m long term. It'd be even worse for us given our needs/situation. You don't put that kind of money into a defensive defenseman and succeed in this league. If you don't believe me, ask Ken Holland.
EDIT: If all you're looking for is a replacement for Redden, you don't pay $5m long term to get it. You spend ~$1.5-2m on a short term deal.
And he's not going to decrease our GA significantly, because there's diminishing marginal returns. Even if he takes us from a top 10 goals against team (2.61) to a top 5 goals against team (2.48) you're talking about preventing only 11 goals per season. Investing that in offense produces a lot more than 11 goals, regardless of how you spend it.
We'll have two scoring threats and the ability to develop around those stars. We aren't getting stars through the draft. We could trade for one, but that'll be extremely costly, especially a 27 year old one.
I don't see any player equivalent to Kovalchuk hitting UFA in the next five years. I don't think any person advocating for Kovalchuk expects him to make us a cup contender next year. He makes us better, and we probably make the playoffs, but I wouldn't consider us a contender.
What Kovalchuk does, is gives us that second scoring threat (and a dynamic one at that). He allows you to continue to build your core by drafting secondary pieces (ie: Dubinsky, Callahan, etc.) and inserting them into the lineup.
I think Gaborik + Kovalchuk + Lundqvist is as strong a core as you'll find, and we've shown through the draft recently that we can add secondary pieces to complement that core. Unfortunately, the secondary pieces alone aren't going to get us anywhere.
We'll have two scoring threats and the ability to develop around those stars. We aren't getting stars through the draft. We could trade for one, but that'll be extremely costly, especially a 27 year old one.
I don't see any player equivalent to Kovalchuk hitting UFA in the next five years. I don't think any person advocating for Kovalchuk expects him to make us a cup contender next year. He makes us better, and we probably make the playoffs, but I wouldn't consider us a contender.
What Kovalchuk does, is gives us that second scoring threat (and a dynamic one at that). He allows you to continue to build your core by drafting secondary pieces (ie: Dubinsky, Callahan, etc.) and inserting them into the lineup.
I think Gaborik + Kovalchuk + Lundqvist is as strong a core as you'll find, and we've shown through the draft recently that we can add secondary pieces to complement that core. Unfortunately, the secondary pieces alone aren't going to get us anywhere.
In the 2011 Free Agency you have: Backes(1), Semin(3), Koivu(2), St Louis ; so you cannot be any more wrong w/ that bolded statement.
In the 2011 Free Agency you have: Backes(1), Semin(3), Koivu(2), St Louis ; so you cannot be any more wrong w/ that bolded statement.
Are you joking? These comparisons are embarrassingly terrible.
Backes had 17 goals and 48 points this season. Kovalchuk had more goals in 2007-2008 than Backes had points this year, and Kovalchuk hasn't scored less than 40g in a season since 2002-2003. In what universe is Backes equivalent to Kovalchuk?
Semin is more one dimensional than Kovalchuk. He put up 40g this year (first time he's done that), but he benefits from playing with/behind Ovechkin. Offensively, a great player and a first line winger, but he's no Kovalchuk.
Koivu is a great two way center, but he's nowhere near as dynamic offensively as Kovalchuk. The most points he's ever scored is 71... the most goals: 22.
St Louis is is 34 years old now. In two years he'll be 36 years old...
I can't even bring myself to type anymore... these comparisons are just terrible, so I'll just restate the obvious:
Quote:
I don't see any player equivalent to Kovalchuk hitting UFA in the next five years.
EDIT: Regarding Richards and Thornton. No guarantee they hit UFA.
If you're going to rag on Kovalchuk's playoff performance, Thornton's the most "unclutch" player in the league. Despite that, I don't see him leaving SJ. They'll let Marleau walk long before him. However, based on his regular season performance, $9m is hardly out of the question if he does leave SJ.
Despite Dallas financial situation, Richards is another guy I see re-signing with his current team. I think Riberio is the guy Dallas is going to move. Richards had a great season this year (91 points), but before this season he hasn't topped 70 points since 2006-2007. Far from a guarantee you get the Richards of this season and not the Richards of the last 3.
Are you joking? These comparisons are embarrassingly terrible.
Backes had 17 goals and 48 points this season. Kovalchuk had more goals in 2007-2008 than Backes had points this year, and Kovalchuk hasn't scored less than 40g in a season since 2002-2003. In what universe is Backes equivalent to Kovalchuk?
Semin is more one dimensional than Kovalchuk. He put up 40g this year (first time he's done that), but he benefits from playing with/behind Ovechkin. Offensively, a great player and a first line winger, but he's no Kovalchuk.
Koivu is a great two way center, but he's nowhere near as dynamic offensively as Kovalchuk. The most points he's ever scored is 71... the most goals: 22.
St Louis is is 34 years old now. In two years he'll be 36 years old...
I can't even bring myself to type anymore... these comparisons are just terrible, so I'll just restate the obvious:
I guess you prefer incomplete hockey players. You don't win championships w/ players like that. I would rather have a Backes or a Koivu on my team over a Kovalchuk 10 out of 10 times. You definitley haven't watched David Backes play. He's a phenonimal hockey player. He lays it all out on the ice every game & is a good scorer as well. So what if he had an off season.
Mikko Koivu is another complete player.
If you're a team like the Devils who has a foundation in place w/ many 2 way players; then yes it makes sense to add a player like Kovalchuk. However, to build a team around this guy is as big of a mistake you can make.
I rather have a hard nosed complete player like Backes than a one dimesnional Kovalchuk who's going to ask for close to MAX.
Mikko Koivu is another complete hockey player out of a great finnish program. Those are guys you win championships with.
It doesn't matter what Kovalchuk asks for, it matters what the market is willing to pay him. I see him ending up with a long-term deal with a cap hit valued between $9-9.5. It doesn't matter if we pay him $11 million a year early in the contract or eleventy-billion dollars.
A $9 million dollar cap hit is only $1.5 million more than Gaborik. We got Gaborik under market value because of his injury history. Kovalchuk at $9.5 is far less of an overpayment than Drury at 7 or Redden at 6.5... unlike those two players, Kovalchuk can earn a $9.5 million dollar cap hit based on his on-ice performance.
It doesn't matter what Kovalchuk asks for, it matters what the market is willing to pay him. I see him ending up with a long-term deal with a cap hit valued between $9-9.5. It doesn't matter if we pay him $11 million a year early in the contract or eleventy-billion dollars.
A $9 million dollar cap hit is only $1.5 million more than Gaborik. We got Gaborik under market value because of his injury history. Kovalchuk at $9.5 is far less of an overpayment than Drury at 7 or Redden at 6.5... unlike those two players, Kovalchuk can earn a $9.5 million dollar cap hit based on his on-ice performance.
That's around 30 mill locked up between 4 players ( Gabby, Drury, Lundqvist, Kovy)
This is going to create depth problems & issues w/ re-signing players within our organization.
I guess you prefer incomplete hockey players. You don't win championships w/ players like that. I would rather have a Backes or a Koivu on my team over a Kovalchuk 10 out of 10 times. You definitley haven't watched David Backes play. He's a phenonimal hockey player. He lays it all out on the ice every game & is a good scorer as well. So what if he had an off season.
Mikko Koivu is another complete player.
If you're a team like the Devils who has a foundation in place w/ many 2 way players; then yes it makes sense to add a player like Kovalchuk. However, to build a team around this guy is as big of a mistake you can make.
Where did I say I didn't want them on my team? I'd love them on my team. I said they aren't equivalent to Kovalchuk. They aren't even in the same ballpark as Kovalchuk.
That's around 30 mill locked up between 4 players ( Gabby, Drury, Lundqvist, Kovy)
This is going to create depth problems & issues w/ re-signing players within our organization.
Drury's gone in 2 years.
Myself, Inferno, and others have demonstrated how it works by signing Kovalchuk in numerous posts (probably earlier in this thread in fact). I'm not going to do it again.
I guess you prefer incomplete hockey players. You don't win championships w/ players like that. I would rather have a Backes or a Koivu on my team over a Kovalchuk 10 out of 10 times. You definitley haven't watched David Backes play. He's a phenonimal hockey player. He lays it all out on the ice every game & is a good scorer as well. So what if he had an off season.
Mikko Koivu is another complete player.
If you're a team like the Devils who has a foundation in place w/ many 2 way players; then yes it makes sense to add a player like Kovalchuk. However, to build a team around this guy is as big of a mistake you can make.
You don't win championships w/ nothing but complementary pieces either...
Backes had an off season? He's played 4 NHL seasons, he scored 48 points this year, 54 last year, and 31 and 23 in the two others.
I think it's you who hasn't watched Backes play. If not, at least have the courtesy to look up his playing history. 50 points is what you're going to get from him. He may leave it all on the ice, but so does Callahan at the end of the day... does that mean you'd rather have Callahan than Kovalchuk?
EDIT: And it's great to have guys like Backes and Callahan, I'm not saying you don't need them, but you still need talented players also. We've got our "Backes" in Callahan, Dubinsky, and numerous prospects who project as heart-and-soul types. Outside of Gaborik, we don't have elite talent or anyone who projects to be elite offensively.
Where did I say I didn't want them on my team? I'd love them on my team. I said they aren't equivalent to Kovalchuk. They aren't even in the same ballpark as Kovalchuk.
Kovalchuk is a top 5 NHL winger.
Backes is a second line winger.
I guess we'll agree to disagree. This comes down to how much you value Kovalchuk. From all the superstars(yes he is one) he'll be the most overrated after his contract. He isn't someone you want to build a team around, which is what you are proposing. He's no where near Ovechkin in terms of being dynamic, which is why an ovechkin can get away for being an individual you can build around. Kovalchuk has much less dimensions to his game than a Ovechkin. He has his shot & speed. Ovechkin, although not a defensive player has an immense amount of dimensions to his game. From his vision, to his skating, to his hitting, dekeing. He's a powerful player & much more magical than a Kovalchuk. You can build a team around an Ovechkin. He would be the guy I pick to start a team with.
Now back to the Backes/Koivu VS Kovalchuk convo. I prefer a guy like Backes & Koivu on my team. That's just my preference. Players like that not only provide flare and scoring, but also provide stability, and it's that stability that wins you championships. It's why teams like Detroit are so sucessful with the niche they have in place ( Zetterberg, Datsyuk, etc)---> these guys are one of the best 2 way guys in the game & they are Detroits top 2 players.
You can probably add both(Backes, Koivu) for the price of 1 kovy, and I'd pefer something like that instead of locking up all the money and years into 1 player, who yes is dynamic offesnively(but far from being top 5 in the league)but at the same time is an incomplete player..
I see you comparing Backes and Callahan. That's as comical as it gets. Callahan has no where near Backes offensive game. Backes will be a around 60 point guy. The seasons you mention w/ him having around 30 points or so were seasons he didnt play all 82 games. So let's not blurr the facts here. I'm fully aware of his numbers, & numbers to me aren't everything. They're a big part of it, but far from being everything.
I guess we'll agree to disagree. This comes down to how much you value Kovalchuk. From all the superstars(yes he is one) he'll be the most overrated after his contract. He isn't someone you want to build a team around, which is what you are proposing. He's no where near Ovechkin in terms of being dynamic, which is why an ovechkin can get away for being an individual you can build around. Kovalchuk has much less dimensions to his game than a Ovechkin. He has his shot & speed. Ovechkin, although not a defensive player has an immense amount of dimensions to his game. From his vision, to his skating, to his hitting, dekeing. He's a powerful player & much more magical than a Kovalchuk. You can build a team around an Ovechkin. He would be the guy I pick to start a team with.
Now back to the Backes/Koivu VS Kovalchuk convo. I prefer a guy like Backes & Koivu on my team. That's just my preference. Players like that not only provide flare and scoring, but also provide stability, and it's that stability that wins you championships. It's why teams like Detroit are so sucessful with the niche they have in place ( Zetterberg, Datsyuk, etc)---> these guys are one of the best 2 way guys in the game & they are Detroits top 2 players.
You can probably add both(Backes, Koivu) for the price of 1 kovy, and I'd pefer something like that instead of locking up all the money and years into 1 player, who yes is dynamic offesnively(but far from being top 5 in the league)but at the same time is an incomplete player..
I think you're selling Kovalchuk short. He doesn't have the physicality or personality of Ovechkin, but his deking, skating and vision are all superb. He also has never had the supporting cast Ovechkin has in Washington (no, the Devils do not count, they have been a ~.430 team since January... the Devils ship has been sinking since long before Kovalchuk arrived).
Are you joking? These comparisons are embarrassingly terrible.
He's played 4 NHL seasons, he scored 48 points this year, 54 last year, and 31 and 23 in the two others. 
