HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Canucks Re-Sign F Mason Raymond to 2-Year, $5.1m Deal ($2.55m/yr cap hit)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-26-2010, 03:53 PM
  #101
metric
Registered User
 
metric's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheriff View Post
Somehow I'm wondering why everyone is acting as if the Canucks had made a big bargain?

Raymond had a career season with 25 goals and everyone's hoping he can produce even more...but he has to prove it !!

The Canucks tripled his salary which seems fair but is no reason to become over-enthusiastic [at least to me].
If you're in Vancouver and heard the numbers being thrown around, you'd be happy too. Although I was still confident he was going to sign in the mid 2 million range. People got all worried when JP Barry threw out numbers in the 3.5-4 million range.

metric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:02 PM
  #102
Sheriff
Registered User
 
Sheriff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 90
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by checksix View Post
People got all worried when JP Barry threw out numbers in the 3.5-4 million range.
Meh Barry should worry about Sundin

But seriously do you believe Raymond would have gotten 4 m from the arbitrator?

Sheriff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:02 PM
  #103
Waveburner
RIP Luc
 
Waveburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In Morrison's house.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCF23 View Post
We only really need 1 bottom 6 forward IMO. I'm fine with a 3rd line of Hodgson - Malhotra - Hansen. Add 1 legit very good 4th liner (someone like Asham) and you have to figure 2 of the glut of 4th liners we have can be good enough to fill the rest.

Ideal world we bring in 2 more bottom 6, but we only really need 1.
I guess for once I'd actually like to see the Canucks put together an 'ideal' roster instead of hoping and praying on the bottom six for roughly the sixth straight season. The Canucks haven't had a good fourth line since pre-lockout days. I'm just tired of it. Ideally a trade of Bieksa for a third liner and acquiring a 4th line center through either trade/FA would be my strategy. No more pencilling in Rypien/Perreault/Bolduc as the fourth line center.

And especially no pencilling Hodgson to the third line. It's as if training camp last season just didn't happen. I realize Hodgson had back issues then, but what degree did it affect him? No one knows and he missed virtually the entire season at a crucial age because of it. Maybe it's just me but pencilling in a 20 y/o kid who was embarrassed at last year's training camp and then missed the entire season just doesn't seem like a 'win now' strategy.

Waveburner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:03 PM
  #104
timw33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,912
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheriff View Post
Somehow I'm wondering why everyone is acting as if the Canucks had made a big bargain?

Raymond had a career season with 25 goals and everyone's hoping he can produce even more...but he has to prove it !!

The Canucks tripled his salary which seems fair but is no reason to become over-enthusiastic [at least to me].
His agent was infering that they were looking for 3.5-4M, which scared the **** out of us because it could either cause a huge cap problem or we would walk away and lose him for nothing.

timw33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:04 PM
  #105
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheriff View Post
Somehow I'm wondering why everyone is acting as if the Canucks had made a big bargain?

Raymond had a career season with 25 goals and everyone's hoping he can produce even more...but he has to prove it !!

The Canucks tripled his salary which seems fair but is no reason to become over-enthusiastic [at least to me].
Because the market dictates that this was a good signing. He's basically getting the same money as players who scored 5-10 fewer goals and 10-15 fewer points in their breakout season.

Value isn't determined in a vacuum.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:09 PM
  #106
Rob Zepp
Registered User
 
Rob Zepp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,991
vCash: 500
Hard to imagine a better deal for the numbers put up. Pretty sure this will look like a significant bargain by end of the two years and the next one will be "OK, gave you a discount last time.....let's get this one right" sort of thing.

Rob Zepp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:10 PM
  #107
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheriff View Post
Meh Barry should worry about Sundin

But seriously do you believe Raymond would have gotten 4 m from the arbitrator?
when an arbiter awarded MacArthur $2.4mill, is there really any surprise that Canuck fans would be worried with what Raymond could get?

MacArthur just came off a season where he produced significantly less, played less minutes, had less of a role on both the teams he played on last season, and was just awarded $2.4mill.

After coming off a season where he put up 16 goals (9 less than Raymond), 35 points (18 less), was his team's worst +/- player and got sheltered icetime all season long, by both the teams he played on, what do you think Raymond would have been awarded by the same arbiter?

I think it was primarily because of that ruling, most Canuck fans thought that Raymond would get overpaid. At that point we were all basically hoping he gets around $3mill, which would be an good deal for the Canucks.

so yeah, $2.55mill does seem like a steal.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:12 PM
  #108
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster View Post
IIRC, the bonus cushion is in effect. So effectively, Hodgson is making only $850K and likely in a role where his bonuses will not be met, which doesn't matter until next year. I don't see how this move (salary wise) will force him into the minors.

On the Raymond signing, just as i had wished, that it would be settled before the hearing. A lot lower than i was expecting. to MG
If there had been a hassle or breakdown with the Raymond settlement then another position might have opened up for Hodgson.

Now Hodgson's only option (it seems to me Malhotra will play third line center) is the third line wing position. But he will have to compete with more experienced players who are both cheaper and don't have a possible contract overhang into next season (like Tambellini or Glass)) which, given the Canuck's razor's edge cap position, might make it more problematic for Hodgson.

Salary difference isn't huge but I think Hodgson will clearly have to out play cheaper options to be on the team.

orcatown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:13 PM
  #109
CCF23
Registered User
 
CCF23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Richmond, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,649
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CCF23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waveburner View Post
I guess for once I'd actually like to see the Canucks put together an 'ideal' roster instead of hoping and praying on the bottom six for roughly the sixth straight season. The Canucks haven't had a good fourth line since pre-lockout days. I'm just tired of it. Ideally a trade of Bieksa for a third liner and acquiring a 4th line center through either trade/FA would be my strategy. No more pencilling in Rypien/Perreault/Bolduc as the fourth line center.
There really isn't an "ideal" team in the salary cap age NHL. Chicago last year was as close as you'll get, and you see what's happening to that team this summer because of it.

If our one hole is a 3rd or a 4th line forward, we're in very good shape.

CCF23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:18 PM
  #110
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
If there had been a hassle or breakdown with the Raymond settlement then another position might have opened up for Hodgson.

Now Hodgson's only option (it seems to me Malhotra will play third line center) is the third line wing position. But he will have to compete with more experienced players who are both cheaper and don't have a possible contract overhang into next season (like Tambellini or Glass)) which, given the Canuck's razor's edge cap position, might make it more problematic for Hodgson.

Salary difference isn't huge but I think Hodgson will clearly have to out play cheaper options to be on the team.
not necessarily.

Gillis specifically mentioned that they liked the fact that Malhotra can play the left wing position, when he signed him. And that's where it could make sense to play him - on a line with Hodgson.

With Hodgson at center and Malhotra on left wing, the latter can take draws regularly, easing Hodgson into that role (and young centers routinely struggle in faceoffs in their early years).

I wouldn't be surprised if our 3rd line next year was:

Malhotra-Hodgson-Hansen

with Malhotra taking the draws, and moving back at center on the 2nd PK unit.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:28 PM
  #111
Sheriff
Registered User
 
Sheriff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 90
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
Because the market dictates that this was a good signing. He's basically getting the same money as players who scored 5-10 fewer goals and 10-15 fewer points in their breakout season.

Value isn't determined in a vacuum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
when an arbiter awarded MacArthur $2.4mill, is there really any surprise that Canuck fans would be worried with what Raymond could get?

MacArthur just came off a season where he produced significantly less, played less minutes, had less of a role on both the teams he played on last season, and was just awarded $2.4mill.

After coming off a season where he put up 16 goals (9 less than Raymond), 35 points (18 less), was his team's worst +/- player and got sheltered icetime all season long, by both the teams he played on, what do you think Raymond would have been awarded by the same arbiter?

I think it was primarily because of that ruling, most Canuck fans thought that Raymond would get overpaid. At that point we were all basically hoping he gets around $3mill, which would be an good deal for the Canucks.

so yeah, $2.55mill does seem like a steal.

You guys are right with your facts - but if you say MacArthur I say Perron. He didn't go to arbitration but he had very similar numbers to Raymond for the last 2 seasons in a row (=consistency) and he signed for 1.8m the next season and 2.5m the year after.
You still gotta keep in mind what Burrows does for just 2m per year btw.


I definitely understand you guys are relieved that the numbers were lower than rumored but I would still call it a decent signing as opposed to a steal.

Sheriff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:31 PM
  #112
denkiteki
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by checksix View Post
If you're in Vancouver and heard the numbers being thrown around, you'd be happy too. Although I was still confident he was going to sign in the mid 2 million range. People got all worried when JP Barry threw out numbers in the 3.5-4 million range.
Correction... he said 1.8 - 4mil as comparable. Pyatt changed it to 3.5 - 4mil instead of 1.8 - 4mil. JP clearly stated earlier in the month that Raymond was looking for a 3 year deal between 2.5 - 3mil. Of course 2 makes more sense for us as it gives us time to work out another deal while Raymond is still a RFA with a clearing picture of what type of player he will be. Basically lower the risk and of course lower the reward since if he develops as expected, we will need to fork out more $$$ (e.g. Kesler).

denkiteki is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:40 PM
  #113
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheriff View Post
You guys are right with your facts - but if you say MacArthur I say Perron. He didn't go to arbitration but he had very similar numbers to Raymond for the last 2 seasons in a row (=consistency) and he signed for 1.8m the next season and 2.5m the year after.
You still gotta keep in mind what Burrows does for just 2m per year btw.


I definitely understand you guys are relieved that the numbers were lower than rumored but I would still call it a decent signing as opposed to a steal.
Burrows is a flat out steal... just not comparable at all here. He wanted to stay in Vancouver, had UFA leverage and decided to sign long-term saying he was leaving money on the table so the team could continue to ice a deep lineup. You shouldn't expect that from any player.

Perron's contract is pretty good as well... but he wasn't arbitration eligible, and as such had less leverage than Raymond. His only option is to basically sit out or play overseas if he didn't like his contract. Raymond was about to walk into arbitration and was guaranteed a deal - unless the Canucks walk away, which makes him a UFA.

Don't you think you should consider such leverage when comparing contracts?

Still, compared with each other, Perron's cap hit is just $400K less than Raymond's. He put up less goals (by 5), less points (by 6), had less icetime (by 1:10), barely played on the PK, had more PP time where he produced less than Raymond did.

and as far as important icetime goes - Raymond was 2nd on his team in quality of competition, playing the 2nd hardest minutes behind Kesler, while Perron sat at 10th among forwards on his team, getting sheltered icetime through the season.

So, while Raymond had more leverage for a better deal, put up better stats, and played a bigger role on a deeper and better team, he walked away with a $400K difference in cap hit?

Does Perron's contract really look any better than Raymond's?

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:41 PM
  #114
thefeebster
Registered User
 
thefeebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,593
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
If there had been a hassle or breakdown with the Raymond settlement then another position might have opened up for Hodgson.

Now Hodgson's only option (it seems to me Malhotra will play third line center) is the third line wing position. But he will have to compete with more experienced players who are both cheaper and don't have a possible contract overhang into next season (like Tambellini or Glass)) which, given the Canuck's razor's edge cap position, might make it more problematic for Hodgson.

Salary difference isn't huge but I think Hodgson will clearly have to out play cheaper options to be on the team.
I think the nitpicking at $200K is a bit unnecessary. I don't see our cap situation that much of a concern that management will send down Hodgson for Tambellini, if their play is comparable/similar. For Cody Hodgson to make the team, he would have to outplay anyone else contending for that spot, no matter what they make.

On the 3rd line, the chances of Hodgson making his bonuses are slim to none, and if he does, it'll be worth it...

Quote:
"A" Bonuses are capped at a total of $850k, and each one can pay out no more than $212,500.

FORWARDS

a) Ice time (top 6 among forwards in either per game or total), must play 42 games.
b) 20 goals
c) 35 assists
d) 60 points
e) .73 points per game (minimum 42 games played)
f) Top 3 amongst forwards in +/- (minimum 42 games played)
g) All-Rookie team
h) All star game
i) All star game MVP

thefeebster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 04:42 PM
  #115
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
not necessarily.

Gillis specifically mentioned that they liked the fact that Malhotra can play the left wing position, when he signed him. And that's where it could make sense to play him - on a line with Hodgson.

With Hodgson at center and Malhotra on left wing, the latter can take draws regularly, easing Hodgson into that role (and young centers routinely struggle in faceoffs in their early years).

I wouldn't be surprised if our 3rd line next year was:

Malhotra-Hodgson-Hansen

with Malhotra taking the draws, and moving back at center on the 2nd PK unit.
I believe that's exactly what will happen. And what better tutor for Hodgson than a guy who was plus 60% on faceoffs last year. of course it helps when the other two centers above you are (A) an Art Ross/Hart Trophy winner and (B) a Selke nominee.

Calls for a drink.

ddawg1950 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 05:17 PM
  #116
Respect Your Edler
Thank You 52
 
Respect Your Edler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: China
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,221
vCash: 500
Oh no, he got 4 million dollars because McArthur got 2.4, the humanity!
See it all worked out and we still have enough money to get that all important third liner.

Respect Your Edler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 05:39 PM
  #117
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,681
vCash: 500
Gillis has also said that he wants to take the 3rd line in a new direction. I think that direction is indicated by the dumping of Wellwood and the pickup of Malhotra.

I think he sees the line as checking line which can chip in some offensively. Putting in Hodgson to replace Wellwood is really not a move in that direction while putting Malhotra at center certainly is.
It is difficult for me to see Hodgson anchoring a defensive line at the NHL level. Ultimately I see Hodgson as being a decent two way player but not as a player separating people from the puck in the defensive zone. I just don't think Hodgson is a player you put in that role and that would certainly be true in the near term.

Whether Hodgson is a better option on the wing than other options the Canucks have is open to question IMO. I think the contract situation does factor in somewhat here, especially given that the fact that Hodgson doesn't have to clear waivers, as others do, and others are cheaper.

I think the point that McGuire made July 1st does apply and that signing of Malhotra, and now the attainment of Raymond at a good cap hit, puts Hodgson in a much more iffy position as far as starting the year with the Canucks.

orcatown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 05:59 PM
  #118
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddawg1950 View Post
I believe that's exactly what will happen. And what better tutor for Hodgson than a guy who was plus 60% on faceoffs last year. of course it helps when the other two centers above you are (A) an Art Ross/Hart Trophy winner and (B) a Selke nominee.

Calls for a drink.
I agree, but I think for Malhotra, the move from Centre to the wing will likely happen over the course of the next couple of years. I think for the up coming season, Hodgson is going to play mostly on the wing.

LeftCoast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 06:09 PM
  #119
NYVanfan
Registered User
 
NYVanfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Gillis has also said that he wants to take the 3rd line in a new direction. I think that direction is indicated by the dumping of Wellwood and the pickup of Malhotra.

I think he sees the line as checking line which can chip in some offensively. Putting in Hodgson to replace Wellwood is really not a move in that direction while putting Malhotra at center certainly is.
It is difficult for me to see Hodgson anchoring a defensive line at the NHL level. Ultimately I see Hodgson as being a decent two way player but not as a player separating people from the puck in the defensive zone. I just don't think Hodgson is a player you put in that role and that would certainly be true in the near term.

Whether Hodgson is a better option on the wing than other options the Canucks have is open to question IMO. I think the contract situation does factor in somewhat here, especially given that the fact that Hodgson doesn't have to clear waivers, as others do, and others are cheaper.

I think the point that McGuire made July 1st does apply and that signing of Malhotra, and now the attainment of Raymond at a good cap hit, puts Hodgson in a much more iffy position as far as starting the year with the Canucks.
yeah, Hodgson will be a very interesting wildcard this camp and preseason. I could see him panning out in 4 scenarios, with liklihood percentages, just for fun ...

1. Off the team (25%)
2. 3rd line W (40%) Hodgson-Malhotra-Hansen
3. 3rd line C (25%) Malhotra-Hodgson-Hansen
4. 2nd line W (10%) Raymond-Kesler-Hodgson

#1 is most likely, with Manny carrying the load, Hodgson eases in.
#2 is a good news scenario, with Hodgson developing strong 2-way play for a rookie
#3 is the great news scenario, with Hodgson performing up to his potential way faster than expected (a la Chicago young guns.) This would allow for a defensively killer 3rd line of Sammy-Manny-Janny.

the possibilities are intriguing...

NYVanfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 06:11 PM
  #120
NuxFan09
Registered User
 
NuxFan09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,577
vCash: 500
I like this signing. As he's young as still has a lot to prove, the short two year length is perfect. The money is also good. $2.55 million is great for a 25 goal, 50+ point player.

I'm at ease now that the Canucks' top 6 is set for a couple years.

D. Sedin - H. Sedin - Burrows
Raymond - Kesler - Samuelsson

NuxFan09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 06:13 PM
  #121
Whitebear
Registered User
 
Whitebear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Fishin the Skeena
Country: Canada
Posts: 340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
I agree, but I think for Malhotra, the move from Centre to the wing will likely happen over the course of the next couple of years. I think for the up coming season, Hodgson is going to play mostly on the wing.
I still think you could see Hodgson moved up to 2nd line center with Kesler moving over or Hodgson on the wing with Kelser staying at center. This gives them the option to move Samualson up to play with the twins (I still get a chubby when I think about that line vs LA) and a checking line of Burrows Maholtra and Hansen.

Whitebear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 06:17 PM
  #122
topheavyhookjaw
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Gillis has also said that he wants to take the 3rd line in a new direction. I think that direction is indicated by the dumping of Wellwood and the pickup of Malhotra.

I think he sees the line as checking line which can chip in some offensively. Putting in Hodgson to replace Wellwood is really not a move in that direction while putting Malhotra at center certainly is.
It is difficult for me to see Hodgson anchoring a defensive line at the NHL level. Ultimately I see Hodgson as being a decent two way player but not as a player separating people from the puck in the defensive zone. I just don't think Hodgson is a player you put in that role and that would certainly be true in the near term.

Whether Hodgson is a better option on the wing than other options the Canucks have is open to question IMO. I think the contract situation does factor in somewhat here, especially given that the fact that Hodgson doesn't have to clear waivers, as others do, and others are cheaper.

I think the point that McGuire made July 1st does apply and that signing of Malhotra, and now the attainment of Raymond at a good cap hit, puts Hodgson in a much more iffy position as far as starting the year with the Canucks.
I wonder if he'd fit well on the second line with Kesler and Raymond. Play Samuelsson with the twins, and Burrows with Malhotra. There's your shut down unit.

Sedin-Sedin-Samuelsson
Raymond-Kesler-Hodgson
Burrows-Malhotra-Hansen

That give you two very good two way lines, anchored by two very good defensive centers. And the potential to produce very well.

topheavyhookjaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 06:26 PM
  #123
CommonAnomaly*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ollirocks View Post
I still think you could see Hodgson moved up to 2nd line center with Kesler moving over or Hodgson on the wing with Kelser staying at center. This gives them the option to move Samualson up to play with the twins (I still get a chubby when I think about that line vs LA) and a checking line of Burrows Maholtra and Hansen.
While i respect your opinion please allow me to share mine. I personally believe sam is the worst possible player to play with the sedins. I dont like that lineup at all. Sam is suited for the second line and i think that is where he should stay. His sort of style (shoot the puck from anywhere and everywhere constantly) doesnt mesh well imo with the sedins down low cycle game. Id rather see burrows/hansen/hodgson with the twins long before sam moved up again.

CommonAnomaly* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 06:27 PM
  #124
Bgav
We Stylin'
 
Bgav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,400
vCash: 500
sweetness

Bgav is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 06:30 PM
  #125
CCF23
Registered User
 
CCF23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Richmond, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,649
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CCF23
Quote:
Originally Posted by NuxFan09 View Post
I like this signing. As he's young as still has a lot to prove, the short two year length is perfect. The money is also good. $2.55 million is great for a 25 goal, 50+ point player.

I'm at ease now that the Canucks' top 6 is set for a couple years.

D. Sedin - H. Sedin - Burrows
Raymond - Kesler - Samuelsson

Hodgson and Schroeder should be crashing the door down for spots when these guys start to leave too .

CCF23 is offline   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 04:51 PM.

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.