Post #43 is where the Prucha for Seabrook talk begins.
Interesting to read the reactions 4 years later.
Quote:
Seabrook was drafted thirteenth if I'm not mistaken. I'm looking long term at this deal and I do not like it. I believe the future strength of the team is on defense with Staal, Sauer, Sanguinetti, Baranka. We need top six forwards and Prucha is a top six forward IMO.
It's the nature of physical leagues like the NHL and moreso NFL where often times guys last like 5 years and are just too beat up to be productive. We've seen it with Svatos, Comrie, Higgins, Anson Carter, O'Sullivan, possibly Frolov, and of course Mike York and Mark Pavelich.
I still think that knee injury in 05-06 against Philly that kept him out of the Olympics played a large role in his decline along with lack of ice time in year 2. We'll never know for sure though unless he comes out and says it.
Seems like pretty much all of us would've done that deal, and rightfully so judging by how Prucha and Seabrook have turned out. Just too bad it didn't get done though...
"I used to pray for good things . I used to ask the Hockey Gods for puck luck for the NYR .
Now all I want is Torts the smug stupid goatee clown to be fired , . I hate Torts . Please hockey gods make him get fired. Please Sean punch him in face" -- Dorado
He'd just add to our ****heap of sub par 3rd liners which then become 4th liners for us. I'll take grachev over prucha anytime, or for a serious fourth liner wiese>grachev>prucha as far as fourth line effectiveness goes.
It's the nature of physical leagues like the NHL and moreso NFL where often times guys last like 5 years and are just too beat up to be productive. We've seen it with Svatos, Comrie, Higgins, Anson Carter, O'Sullivan, possibly Frolov, and of course Mike York and Mark Pavelich.
I still think that knee injury in 05-06 against Philly that kept him out of the Olympics played a large role in his decline along with lack of ice time in year 2. We'll never know for sure though unless he comes out and says it.
I don't think a lot of your examples work...
Comrie, Higgins and O'Sullivan have either had attitude problems, a hard time fitting into lockerrooms, a hard time finding consistency, and/or all 3.
Frolov's problem will never have to do with the physicality of the league. That's purely a euro stereotype. Frolov's great when it comes to playing in the dirty areas.
Thank god your not advocating us picking him up. Right?
NO.
Just pointing how much Prucha was loved on these boards and his fall from being the poster boy for the post-lockout Rangers to being waived. Even before Prucha became a Ranger,we followed his Czech team in the playoffs.
There was a even a Prucha song. An old European techno song and they added the PRU-CHA. I think Darius Kasparaitis came up with it.
To be honest, Brent Seabrook is probably as good as any D-man we have on the roster (that includes Tyutin.) Don't give me the examples of Staal, Baranka, Sauer or Sanguinetti as to why the Rangers shouldn't deal for a young defenseman. What do all those four players have in common? They're not currently in NY, and a case could be made that Seabrook is better, or at least as good as any one of them right now.
Comrie, Higgins and O'Sullivan have either had attitude problems, a hard time fitting into lockerrooms, a hard time finding consistency, and/or all 3.
Frolov's problem will never have to do with the physicality of the league. That's purely a euro stereotype. Frolov's great when it comes to playing in the dirty areas.
I'm actually a big Frolov fan and I wasn't talking about his physicality because he still goes in the dirty areas but maybe the fact that he himself has been pounded for 6-7 years and may not be as effective to getting open, succeeding on wraparounds, etc.
I was just making a point that there are many NHLers who score 25-30 goals for a few years and then have an unexpected sudden decline.
What was Michal Grosek's issue after that one year in Buffalo?
I'm actually pleasantly surprise with my responses back then. I was convinced I would have been in the 'hell no' contingent, but I somehow actually felt that Seabrook was a gamer back then. I thought Prucha was a good player too that would stick around, but I really hated our D in '06. I couldn't wait to trade most away. But part of me now thinks I was just trying to be objective to impress some of the more experienced posters. I didn't know much in '06 and know just a little bit more now.
