HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Nashville Predators
Notices

Weber's value

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-21-2010, 01:04 PM
  #76
token grinder
Registered User
 
token grinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 4,066
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPavs8Cluthcy View Post
As a fan, I like Pavelski more than Setoguchi. But as a GM, I'd take Setoguchi over Pavelski. 23 years old (not turning 24 until Jan. 1 2011) and already has scored 30 goals, and with a little consistency boost, he might be able to score 50 with a playmaker beside him. He's a natural goal scorer, plain and simple. He will be an elite player one day.

i like both of them. I have seen pavelski raise his game. setaguchi did squat when he wasn't on the thornton line. his game just screams jonathan cheechoo at me.

token grinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 02:07 PM
  #77
Gilligans Island
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Gilligans Island's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SF/Bay Area
Posts: 5,798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by token grinder View Post
i like both of them. I have seen pavelski raise his game. setaguchi did squat when he wasn't on the thornton line. his game just screams jonathan cheechoo at me.
As a Sharks fan, if we could deal Pavs +++ for Weber (or even Suter), I'd consider it. We do have Couture who is a similar player ready to step in to the lineup.

Reading Preds fans here, it seems highly unlikely Weber will be available but for discussion sake,

Pavelski, McGinn, 1st and a (lower pick or mid-level prospect)? Are we in the ballpark or am in out to lunch?

Gilligans Island is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 02:17 PM
  #78
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilligans Island View Post
As a Sharks fan, if we could deal Pavs +++ for Weber (or even Suter), I'd consider it. We do have Couture who is a similar player ready to step in to the lineup.

Reading Preds fans here, it seems highly unlikely Weber will be available but for discussion sake,

Pavelski, McGinn, 1st and a (lower pick or mid-level prospect)? Are we in the ballpark or am in out to lunch?
Still a no go. McGinn is a grinder which we have plenty of. Pavelski, Couture and a 1st would probably get it done though.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 02:22 PM
  #79
Gilligans Island
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Gilligans Island's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SF/Bay Area
Posts: 5,798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
Still a no go. McGinn is a grinder which we have plenty of. Pavelski, Couture and a 1st would probably get it done though.
Good to know there is something that could work.
How about Pavs, Vlasic and a 1st?

Would be tough to lose both Pavs and Couture as we'd have a hole at 2C. If we re-sign Marleau, he could go back to C but he seems better as a winger.

Gilligans Island is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 02:27 PM
  #80
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilligans Island View Post
Good to know there is something that could work.
How about Pavs, Vlasic and a 1st?

Would be tough to lose both Pavs and Couture as we'd have a hole at 2C. If we re-sign Marleau, he could go back to C but he seems better as a winger.
As I said earlier on Vlasic, no...lol.

To get someone of Weber's talent level you're gonna have to give up quite a bit. I know it's a lot in Pavs and Couture but look at what you're getting in return. I still wouldn't do it personally if I were a GM but I think if I had to trade Weber, I think I could live with my proposed deal.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 02:44 PM
  #81
David Singleton
HFB Partner
 
David Singleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Dickson, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 1,217
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by triggrman View Post
I think they could afford a 2 year deal for 4m...
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
only if they trade dumont. but why would hammer take a two year deal? he'd be a fool, since most quality UFAs get 4 or 5 year deals when they are first eligible

if he takes 2 yrs at 4 mil from us and then gets hurt he probably screws himself out of 12-15 million dollars.

now if he's dumb enough to take it, poile should certainly offer it..
Trig, I agree with Voldy here in that I don't really see how that's possible (without moving one of the top six).

That said, I'd love to see how they could afford both while still maintaining their budget of $46-ish million.

David Singleton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 02:52 PM
  #82
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,772
vCash: 500
What if Poile offered Hamhuis a longer term deal in the $3.5 million range, is that a wise move on our part? Say for 4-6 years? Just trying to figure out the price point where it makes sense to keep Hamhuis or let him walk and not really sure where those numbers/years are.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 03:23 PM
  #83
David Singleton
HFB Partner
 
David Singleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Dickson, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 1,217
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
What if Poile offered Hamhuis a longer term deal in the $3.5 million range, is that a wise move on our part? Say for 4-6 years? Just trying to figure out the price point where it makes sense to keep Hamhuis or let him walk and not really sure where those numbers/years are.
According to capgeek.com, the Predators have roughly $4 million (before any trades, waivers, etc.) available to sign/slot for 3 defensemen and one backup goalie (working with the internal budget of $46 million).

Among those that could be signed: Hornqvist, Hamhuis, Grebeshkov, Bouillon, and Franson.

Assume a backup goalie is brought in at roughly the minimum ($500,000). That leaves $3.5 to sign three defensemen and Hornqvist. There are already thirteen forwards on contract, but let's assume one is moved to re-sign Hornqvist freeing up the $500,000 that was moved. Now we're back to $4 million for three defensemen and Hornqvist.

If you assume Hornqvist signs a discounted contract of $2 million (I think that will end up being a little low to the actual contract), that only leaves $2 million for three other defensemen. Blum would cost you roughly a million as would Franson. Bouillon would probably cost you $1.5 million. You could do either Franson or Blum and two yet-to-be-named defensemen at the league minimum of $500,000 each.

That leaves the Predators blueline as:

Weber-Suter
Klein-Blum/Franson
John Doe-James Doe

Icing something like that puts this franchise two steps back- on the ice and with the fans. It's why I believe that this offseason, and not the next, represents the crossroads for this franchise.

I go through that exercise to point out my belief that it is impossible to re-sign Hamhuis and Hornqvist without one or more of the following events occurring: (1) trade a top six forward, (2) increase the budget to the midpoint of the cap- roughly $48 million.

Even then, it's pretty tight overall.

The wife and kids are away this weekend, so I'm going to get to answer my own questions from my last blog and "play David Poile for a weekend" for my next blog.

David Singleton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 03:41 PM
  #84
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,772
vCash: 500
Well here comes the next question, Mr. Poile, I mean David, which is smarter to do, weaken us up front a little by trading a top 6 or weaken our blue line by letting Hamhuis, Grebs and Bouillon all walk away. I think we have to try and trade either Arnott or Dumont and keep Hamhuis. I think we can absorb the loss of Arnott or Dumont a lot more than the loss of Hamhuis at this point.

Arnott is on the downside of his career. He is one good hit away from being mush in his head. I think JP's reduced role is not worth the salary he's getting either. I would prefer to move Arnott for two reasons, it puts Legwand and Wilson as our top 2 centers and puts pressure on them to perform offensively which is something these guys need to have on them, pressure. It allows Goc to be the number 3 center which gives us a decent center rotation up top. Also, by moving Arnott, I think we get rid of the complacency on the ice/lack of effort from shift to shift and the leadership group is switched to Weber and Suter which is where this team needs to move it to for long term success.

This also keeps the core of the blue line together and since we're a team that is built from the goal out, to have a lot of inexperience on the blue line would not benefit us at this point.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 03:42 PM
  #85
PredsV82
Snot Doc
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kentucky
Country: Scotland
Posts: 11,341
vCash: 0
Weber is not going to be available for picks, no matter how high, or prospects, no matter how promising. We are still playing to win, not rebuilding, and so we'd have to get a superstar in return.... but really the only players Poile would have to actually consider trading Weber for now are likely already on deals we cant afford this coming year anyway(Malkin, Iginla, Semin, etc.)

.

PredsV82 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 03:46 PM
  #86
PredsV82
Snot Doc
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kentucky
Country: Scotland
Posts: 11,341
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
What if Poile offered Hamhuis a longer term deal in the $3.5 million range, is that a wise move on our part? Say for 4-6 years? Just trying to figure out the price point where it makes sense to keep Hamhuis or let him walk and not really sure where those numbers/years are.
no. This team cannot afford to pay the #3 defenseman 3.5 million dollars. Assuming we do sign Weber and Suter long term(at around 11 million per total for both, which may be wishful thinking but i think itll be close), then we probably cant afford to pay the second pair more than 3.5 mil for BOTH players, and 1.5 mil max for our third pair(again total, for both players).

PredsV82 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 03:53 PM
  #87
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
no. This team cannot afford to pay the #3 defenseman 3.5 million dollars. Assuming we do sign Weber and Suter long term(at around 11 million per total for both, which may be wishful thinking but i think itll be close), then we probably cant afford to pay the second pair more than 3.5 mil for BOTH players, and 1.5 mil max for our third pair(again total, for both players).
But if you're a team that is built on goaltending and D, how can you afford not to pay you're number 3 that kind of money? Pay your number 4-6 guys a million each and give Hamhuis 3.5. That would total 17.5 million for your 6 d-men, two of which are elite guys and one who is a very solid number 3. At some point something has to give unfortunately.

Regardless of what you and I think should be slotted for salaries for certain positions, who is easier to replace at this point, Hamhuis or Arnott?

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 04:11 PM
  #88
David Singleton
HFB Partner
 
David Singleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Dickson, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 1,217
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
Well here comes the next question, Mr. Poile, I mean David, which is smarter to do, weaken us up front a little by trading a top 6 or weaken our blue line by letting Hamhuis, Grebs and Bouillon all walk away. I think we have to try and trade either Arnott or Dumont and keep Hamhuis. I think we can absorb the loss of Arnott or Dumont a lot more than the loss of Hamhuis at this point.

Arnott is on the downside of his career. He is one good hit away from being mush in his head. I think JP's reduced role is not worth the salary he's getting either. I would prefer to move Arnott for two reasons, it puts Legwand and Wilson as our top 2 centers and puts pressure on them to perform offensively which is something these guys need to have on them, pressure. It allows Goc to be the number 3 center which gives us a decent center rotation up top. Also, by moving Arnott, I think we get rid of the complacency on the ice/lack of effort from shift to shift and the leadership group is switched to Weber and Suter which is where this team needs to move it to for long term success.

This also keeps the core of the blue line together and since we're a team that is built from the goal out, to have a lot of inexperience on the blue line would not benefit us at this point.
You trying to get me to give up all the good stuff for my next blog? Of course, that would imply that there actually would be good stuff in it- certainly a break from the norm.

To me, in my role of acting-David Poile, that's easy. If the coaching staff and/or the overall philosophy remains in place of being a defensive-oriented club (obviously the case without completely changing personnel), then you favor defense/goaltending above all else.

The next trick is to carry through with the goal to "make fixing the power play the highest priority". I'll cover that too.

David Singleton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 04:16 PM
  #89
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Singleton View Post
You trying to get me to give up all the good stuff for my next blog? Of course, that would imply that there actually would be good stuff in it- certainly a break from the norm.

To me, in my role of acting-David Poile, that's easy. If the coaching staff and/or the overall philosophy remains in place of being a defensive-oriented club (obviously the case without completely changing personnel), then you favor defense/goaltending above all else.

The next trick is to carry through with the goal to "make fixing the power play the highest priority". I'll cover that too.
Which leads me to another interesting question, if they couldn't figure it out all season long, is an offseason with basically the same players and staff going to be able to correct or fix it?

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 04:30 PM
  #90
PredsV82
Snot Doc
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kentucky
Country: Scotland
Posts: 11,341
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
But if you're a team that is built on goaltending and D, how can you afford not to pay you're number 3 that kind of money? Pay your number 4-6 guys a million each and give Hamhuis 3.5. That would total 17.5 million for your 6 d-men, two of which are elite guys and one who is a very solid number 3. At some point something has to give unfortunately.

Regardless of what you and I think should be slotted for salaries for certain positions, who is easier to replace at this point, Hamhuis or Arnott?
given what we have in the pipeline, Hamhuis.

Klein will become the #3, Franson plays full time, Buillon or another servicable vet signs, Sulzer probably gets one last chance to secure a p[ermanent spot, and Blum is waiting in the wings with Ellis and Josi behind him when Klein and Franson becomes expendable.

Arnott will only be replaceable internally if Wilson steps up big time next year. otherwise we will be back in the UFA market or if Arny has a good year he might get a one year extension. EDIT:And I read your other post realized and you're talking about moving Arnott this summer... now who in their right mind would take him off our hands, even if he was of a mind to waive his NMC?

PredsV82 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 05:26 PM
  #91
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
given what we have in the pipeline, Hamhuis.

Klein will become the #3, Franson plays full time, Buillon or another servicable vet signs, Sulzer probably gets one last chance to secure a p[ermanent spot, and Blum is waiting in the wings with Ellis and Josi behind him when Klein and Franson becomes expendable.

Arnott will only be replaceable internally if Wilson steps up big time next year. otherwise we will be back in the UFA market or if Arny has a good year he might get a one year extension. EDIT:And I read your other post realized and you're talking about moving Arnott this summer... now who in their right mind would take him off our hands, even if he was of a mind to waive his NMC?
Just because those guys you mentioned are in the pipeline does not mean they're ready for full time duty. As big a supporter as I've been of Klein I do not see him ready to step into the #3 spot next year. Hamhuis pulls a lot of minutes for us and hardly misses time due to injury. That is something that is often overlooked in his game, the fact that he's in the lineup on a nightly basis.

Bouillon was a great pick up for us last year but I doubt we are able to pick up a vet like that, at a lower price, that will perform the way the Cube did for us. So that's two spots that are already weaker on our blue line.

Franson, while playing a pretty simple and solid game last year, is he ready to step up and play more minutes? Is Sulzer ready to play at this level and stay healthy? Same could be asked about Laakso.

I am fine with Blum being on the blue line but questions still need to be answered about him as well.

So if you're ready to go into next season with Weber/Suter as the only real players we have on the blue line I think we're in for a long season. All the other guys you mentioned are a few years away from being main contributors on the blue line. I just don't see how letting Hamhuis walk makes us a better team.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 08:25 PM
  #92
David Singleton
HFB Partner
 
David Singleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Dickson, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 1,217
vCash: 500
Well, I completed the blog.

You guys can take your shots.

lol

David Singleton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2010, 10:21 AM
  #93
JPavs8Clutchy*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bye
Country: United States
Posts: 4,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by token grinder View Post
i like both of them. I have seen pavelski raise his game. setaguchi did squat when he wasn't on the thornton line. his game just screams jonathan cheechoo at me.
He did stuff, trust me, he was hurt, thornton is a good player who will inflate your stats, but Setoguchi is very unlike cheech

JPavs8Clutchy* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2010, 10:59 AM
  #94
Dave is a killer
Roll Wide Roll
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Country: Italy
Posts: 22,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Singleton View Post
Well, I completed the blog.

You guys can take your shots.

lol
That's a pretty damn good assessment & I'd also like Dustin Byfuglien on this team ... he's a mobile big body forward ... be fun to play with Wilson/Hornqvist or Legwand/Erat ... I don't know about trading Suter though ... I love our top pairing dmen & hope we can keep them both ... the real question becomes do we keep one of our top pairing (Suter OR Weber) & resign the rest or do we resign the top pair as is & let everyone else walk on the back end ... and rotate kids for the time being until we get enough revenue to be able to keep all of our kids

Dave is a killer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2010, 11:43 AM
  #95
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Singleton View Post
Well, I completed the blog.

You guys can take your shots.

lol
There were things I agree and disagree with. Your thoughts on Buff are great but after the playoffs he's having, he's not going anywhere. They can trade Versteeg a whole lot easier than him.

After watching Chicago and Buff play the way he has, I don't see us moving Weber because Weber is probably one of the few guys in the league that would have a chance of moving Buff out of the crease.

I do like your thoughts on moving Arnott and/or Dumont though. To me, it makes more sense to move one of them then to lose Hamhuis and Grebs. I like your thoughts on keeping the Cube but $1.5 million a season for 3 years may be a bit much to keep him. I think we can find other vets that will get less salary that might be good fits but I have to say, we really lucked out with him this year and was probably our 3rd best defenseman for a bulk of the year.

Here's the conundrum for me and I think you as well, how do we handle the salary issues. Do we try to handle it this offseason or next. If things stay status quo this offseason, Arnott and Dumont stay, we probably lose Hamhuis, Grebs and Bouillon and we have a very young blue line. In this scenario, Arnott and Sullivan come off the books next year freeing up some money to re-sign Weber and we are able to negotiate an extension on Suter as well. There is the scenario of Radulov coming back since his KHL deal is up as well. He could come in and give us a very cheap scoring option to replace Sully on the wing. Whether or not how we feel personally about Rads, it is an option that we have to look at.

The other option is to try and trade a few of the vets this offseason, try and re-sign either Hamhuis, Grebs or Bouillon or two of the three, stay strong on the blue line, supplement the losses up front with a free agent pick up or two or the guys we may pick up in a trade for some of the vets. It would be a relatively big shake up to the lineup and a risk but it allows us to keep the blue line more together than not. The thing is, the shake up is going to happen either this year or next year. Sully and Arnott will either be playing their last year here next year or they've already done it this past season. So it really depends on how Poile wants to play this.

The PP I won't even get into because until some sort of change is made on the roster or the coaching staff, I don't see it getting any better.

Nice job on the blog David.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2010, 12:26 PM
  #96
David Singleton
HFB Partner
 
David Singleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Dickson, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 1,217
vCash: 500
Thanks folks.

Don't get too carried away with my remarks on Suter. I don't believe that Nashville should or will have to part ways with either of their elite defensemen.

My only real point there was that if Poile chose to move one to provide more flexibility, it made more sense to move Suter instead of Weber. Nashville has two potential replacements in Jonathon Blum and Ryan Ellis for Ryan Suter, and none to replace what Shea Weber brings to the table. Even then, I'm talking two years from now.

Increase the budget to $48 million and I think this team can manage their roster, improving it, pretty well the next few years- while also keeping Weber and Suter.

As for Buff, I really don't think Chicago can afford to keep Buff after this season. Even if they could, they would then lose him the following offseason because they couldn't given him a raise. I suspect that they will trade him while he's hot, hoping it offsets the leverage the other team has in knowing Chicago's condition.

Even if Nashville can't bring back a significant player for Arnott and Dumont, the draft picks (whatever they be) and the cap space would help Poile immensely in keeping keep personnel on the blueline, signing Hornqvist, and bringing in another top six forward.

I think Radulov is the key replacement for Sullivan, allowing the remainder of Sullivan's contract go to Suter and Weber. It also still allows that $5-6 million go to an elite forward if Poile so chooses.

Glen, you ask the right question- do it now or next offseason? You don't do it now and the team take a couple of steps back next season on and off the ice. Can the team financially handle that? I'm not sure it can.

Increase the budget slightly, be only a little bit aggressive, and you can make positive headlines and goodwill by showing you mean what you said about improving the team. It also puts the team in the best position to succeed financially going forward.

We'll see what happens.

Thanks again folks.

David Singleton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2010, 12:30 PM
  #97
predfan98
Registered User
 
predfan98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,433
vCash: 500
To move either Arnott or Dumont requires them approving of the move.

I just don't see that happening.

predfan98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2010, 12:37 PM
  #98
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Singleton View Post
Thanks folks.

Don't get too carried away with my remarks on Suter. I don't believe that Nashville should or will have to part ways with either of their elite defensemen.

My only real point there was that if Poile chose to move one to provide more flexibility, it made more sense to move Suter instead of Weber. Nashville has two potential replacements in Jonathon Blum and Ryan Ellis for Ryan Suter, and none to replace what Shea Weber brings to the table. Even then, I'm talking two years from now.

Increase the budget to $48 million and I think this team can manage their roster, improving it, pretty well the next few years- while also keeping Weber and Suter.

As for Buff, I really don't think Chicago can afford to keep Buff after this season. Even if they could, they would then lose him the following offseason because they couldn't given him a raise. I suspect that they will trade him while he's hot, hoping it offsets the leverage the other team has in knowing Chicago's condition.

Even if Nashville can't bring back a significant player for Arnott and Dumont, the draft picks (whatever they be) and the cap space would help Poile immensely in keeping keep personnel on the blueline, signing Hornqvist, and bringing in another top six forward.

I think Radulov is the key replacement for Sullivan, allowing the remainder of Sullivan's contract go to Suter and Weber. It also still allows that $5-6 million go to an elite forward if Poile so chooses.

Glen, you ask the right question- do it now or next offseason? You don't do it now and the team take a couple of steps back next season on and off the ice. Can the team financially handle that? I'm not sure it can.

Increase the budget slightly, be only a little bit aggressive, and you can make positive headlines and goodwill by showing you mean what you said about improving the team. It also puts the team in the best position to succeed financially going forward.

We'll see what happens.

Thanks again folks.
So then how do we keep some of the components of the blue line together? I think you're right in that we don't do the major overhaul until next season when we should have parts coming back, Radulov, salary opening up, Arnott and Sully and a few others and then we have the flexibility. In the meantime, how do we give enough of a salary increase to keep Hornqvist happy while re-signing Franson and either Hamhuis, Grebs or Bouillon? You talk about moving forward and I agree the team needs to do that but can the owners afford to bump the salary up without going over the midpoint and losing revenue sharing? Losing all 3 of the vets in my mind is a huge loss and step in the wrong direction. I know we just can't throw money at guys but at the same time, we can't lose talent like that and expect young guys to fill in year after year. See what's happened the last 2 years when we tried to do that? It bit us in the butt. Hornqvist and Jones weren't ready and it hurt our offense because we were expecting them to put up some numbers. Same could be said this year in that we were counting on Sulzer, Laakso and Franson to step in. Franson finally took hold but what if we weren't able to sign Bouillon, I hate to think of what could've happened.

There is a modicum of risk in anything we do. We either add salary, lose vets/use younger players or trade off vets to allow salary flexibility. I think you're right, if the owners can open the wallets a little bit more this offseason and allow us to keep a guy like Hamhuis all the while re-signing Hornqvist and a back up goalie, I think we'll be ok. My big fear is Hamhuis, Grebs and Bouillon all walking and having Klein, Franson, Sulzer and Blum as our #3-6 defensemen next year.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2010, 03:33 PM
  #99
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chattanooga TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,341
vCash: 500
I disagree on Arnott/Dumont not approving the move. I think both would, especially Dumont.

__________________
- Enoch -
Enoch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2010, 04:03 PM
  #100
PredsV82
Snot Doc
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kentucky
Country: Scotland
Posts: 11,341
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
Just because those guys you mentioned are in the pipeline does not mean they're ready for full time duty. As big a supporter as I've been of Klein I do not see him ready to step into the #3 spot next year. Hamhuis pulls a lot of minutes for us and hardly misses time due to injury. That is something that is often overlooked in his game, the fact that he's in the lineup on a nightly basis.

Bouillon was a great pick up for us last year but I doubt we are able to pick up a vet like that, at a lower price, that will perform the way the Cube did for us. So that's two spots that are already weaker on our blue line.

Franson, while playing a pretty simple and solid game last year, is he ready to step up and play more minutes? Is Sulzer ready to play at this level and stay healthy? Same could be asked about Laakso.

I am fine with Blum being on the blue line but questions still need to be answered about him as well.

So if you're ready to go into next season with Weber/Suter as the only real players we have on the blue line I think we're in for a long season. All the other guys you mentioned are a few years away from being main contributors on the blue line. I just don't see how letting Hamhuis walk makes us a better team.
well duh.. of course letting Hamhuis walk doesnt make us a better team...

but the only way I see to keep him is to plan on letting Weber or Suter go and that would make us a much MUCH worse team.

You may be right that the guys in the pipeline arent ready to move up and fill in the higher slots, but the preds are built on EXACTLY that principle, so they will almost certainly be given the shot.... just like Hamhuis, Zidlicky, Suter, Weber and so on were... nobody was SURE they were ready, but they all stepped up when given the chance and we have to hope Klein and Franson will do so as well... if they dont Poile will have to find a vet at the last minute, and there are plenty of serviceable guys around. Is this an ideal scenario? Of course not.. but its likey the best we can do.

PredsV82 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:38 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.