HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Notices

Sharks interested in NJs Langenbrunner (UPD traded to DAL)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-27-2010, 01:22 AM
  #26
Raym11
Phaneuf sucks
 
Raym11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,692
vCash: 500
Langenbrunner has sucked this season. Like super sucked. I don't think he'd even be worth the "veteran" in the locker room presence.

Raym11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 02:01 AM
  #27
Patty Ice
Best in the World
 
Patty Ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: OxNard
Country: Northern Ireland
Posts: 10,063
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Patty Ice Send a message via MSN to Patty Ice
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
From the looks of the story, it appears that the writer is speculating. he also didn't bother to look up JL's NTC (no mention of it although he mentioned Arnott's).
From the article:

Quote:
Conveniently, the scouts are circling, and the player they want most is the captain with the no-trade clause, Jamie Langenbrunner.

__________________
Patty Ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 10:47 AM
  #28
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 11,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patty Ice View Post
From the article:
Thanks. I missed.

BTW, I did the lookup on playoff numbers. They are very, very good. Not top tier, but close.


Last edited by SJeasy: 12-27-2010 at 11:26 AM.
SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 02:40 PM
  #29
VP and GM
Havlat Sucks!
 
VP and GM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: at home
Country: United States
Posts: 5,245
vCash: 500
You have to ask your self - it this the player that will enable us to win the cup this season? I have to say that he might help but would not be my first need i'd want to fill. Given that he'd cosdt alot probally, i'd pass unless we get a package that includes another player we really8 need.

We need a top 4 D!

VP and GM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 03:08 PM
  #30
sjshrky27
Registered User
 
sjshrky27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,620
vCash: 500
What would suit the Sharks better:

A Shut down D player?

Or a offensive minded D?

(you cannot choose both)

IMO- (I think a shutdown D would be best)

Im not asking for names of players or anything... just curious what type would be best for the team.

sjshrky27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 03:15 PM
  #31
Jesus Toews*
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Davis, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjshrky27 View Post
What would suit the Sharks better:

A Shut down D player?

Or a offensive minded D?

(you cannot choose both)

IMO- (I think a shutdown D would be best)

Im not asking for names of players or anything... just curious what type would be best for the team.
Well the only viable answer is both. In today's NHL you can't get away with using one-dimensional "shutdown" defensemen in a prominent role if said player is incapable of moving the puck. Scott Hannan did nothing to change the Capitals' fortunes when he was traded earlier this month and Robyn Regehr has been useless in Calgary for several seasons now. Detroit and Vancouver, clearly the class of the Western Conference, pretty much have nothing BUT puck-moving defensemen (a.k.a. those who are not only solid in their own end but capable of jumpstarting the offense) in their fully healthy top six. Same goes for Dallas who is enjoying an unexpected degree of success thus far. Boston has the best goaltender in the world right now and an offense so deep that Marc Savard is their third-line center and Tyler Seguin has been often relegated to press box duty yet they're 8th in the East. Why? A lack of PMDs/disappointing seasons from the few they have. A one-dimensional shutdown defenseman's only value anymore is if paired with an exceptional two-way d-man (see the Scuderi--Doughty pairing tonight against the Kings [unless Murray opts to go with Johnson--Doughty]). So, to answer your question, the Sharks need a true two-way guy and, unfortunately for them, not many are on the market right now. Steve Montador out of Buffalo could possibly be on the move by the deadline and he has decent puck skills to go along with a solid defensive game but his addition won't exactly bolster the Sharks' back end. Keith Ballard would have been a perfect addition over the summer. Fedor Tyutin would have been a great pick-up a year or so ago. Christian Ehrhoff should not have been traded to clear space for Blake.

Jesus Toews* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 05:48 PM
  #32
Arkansas Shark
Hilary Knight ♥♥♥♥♥
 
Arkansas Shark's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Arkansawww/NorCal
Country: United States
Posts: 3,292
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Yeah but at least two were from playing on the first line (and the others probably on the 3rd). Plus the Sharks need a token black.
I love it.

Arkansas Shark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 06:23 PM
  #33
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,096
vCash: 500
I'd do Huskins and a 2nd for him but I doubt he waives his NTC for San Jose. He will have a choice of destinations that includes Dallas and Detroit. I'm fairly certain both teams can field a competitive offer plus get Langenbrunner's consent.

However, if that trade was made, it'd be doable and they'd arguably be better on the blue line for it.

Marleau-Thornton-Heatley
Clowe-Couture-Setoguchi
Mitchell-Pavelski-Langenbrunner
McGinn-Nichol-Mayers

Murray-Boyle
Vlasic-Demers
Wallin-Braun

In terms of helping the blue line, I think this makes them better but it carries with it a lot of risk. I'd rather keep Huskins over Wallin but that's not practical. Keeping both is pointless and most likely a hindrance to the team's success. However, I think Braun has earned a spot in the lineup and I believe he, like Demers, will benefit greatly from being in regularly and getting playoff experience.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 06:55 PM
  #34
Nighthock
**** the Kings ...
 
Nighthock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Reno, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 15,606
vCash: 1004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
I'd do Huskins and a 2nd for him but I doubt he waives his NTC for San Jose. He will have a choice of destinations that includes Dallas and Detroit. I'm fairly certain both teams can field a competitive offer plus get Langenbrunner's consent.

However, if that trade was made, it'd be doable and they'd arguably be better on the blue line for it.

Marleau-Thornton-Heatley
Clowe-Couture-Setoguchi
Mitchell-Pavelski-Langenbrunner
McGinn-Nichol-Mayers

Murray-Boyle
Vlasic-Demers
Wallin-Braun

In terms of helping the blue line, I think this makes them better but it carries with it a lot of risk. I'd rather keep Huskins over Wallin but that's not practical. Keeping both is pointless and most likely a hindrance to the team's success. However, I think Braun has earned a spot in the lineup and I believe he, like Demers, will benefit greatly from being in regularly and getting playoff experience.
I approve of this post - well put

Nighthock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 08:02 PM
  #35
param
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,033
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
I'd do Huskins and a 2nd for him but I doubt he waives his NTC for San Jose. He will have a choice of destinations that includes Dallas and Detroit. I'm fairly certain both teams can field a competitive offer plus get Langenbrunner's consent.

However, if that trade was made, it'd be doable and they'd arguably be better on the blue line for it.

Marleau-Thornton-Heatley
Clowe-Couture-Setoguchi
Mitchell-Pavelski-Langenbrunner
McGinn-Nichol-Mayers

Murray-Boyle
Vlasic-Demers
Wallin-Braun

In terms of helping the blue line, I think this makes them better but it carries with it a lot of risk. I'd rather keep Huskins over Wallin but that's not practical. Keeping both is pointless and most likely a hindrance to the team's success. However, I think Braun has earned a spot in the lineup and I believe he, like Demers, will benefit greatly from being in regularly and getting playoff experience.
I don't think getting rid of a one of our more consistent defensive defenseman would be that great of an idea, especially for the playoffs. I'm having a tough time understanding how "keeping them both is pointless and most likely a hindrance to the team's success"? You can give Braun more playing time after the deadline and during the playoffs. Just because Wallin's on the team, doesn't mean that he has to play.

param is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 08:33 PM
  #36
RainbowDash
20% Cooler
 
RainbowDash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Equestria
Posts: 1,924
vCash: 500
I like Langenbrunner. He would defiantly bring a great deal of toughness with scoring touch to the team.

We can fit him under the cap if we trade Mitchell and keep a 20 man roster.

I know some of you like Mitchell, but speed is useless if you can't score, can't check, and have hands made of stone.

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/con...7&event=CHI598


Last edited by RainbowDash: 12-27-2010 at 08:55 PM.
RainbowDash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 09:47 PM
  #37
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by param View Post
I don't think getting rid of a one of our more consistent defensive defenseman would be that great of an idea, especially for the playoffs. I'm having a tough time understanding how "keeping them both is pointless and most likely a hindrance to the team's success"? You can give Braun more playing time after the deadline and during the playoffs. Just because Wallin's on the team, doesn't mean that he has to play.
I think if you put Wallin in the role and minutes that Huskins is in, you'd see similar results. Wallin sucks when he's being overplayed and outmatched. They're redundant because neither are particularly strong defensively. Neither are particularly strong at moving the puck. Both are at their best in the third pairing. All that said, I did say I'd rather keep Huskins over Wallin but he's the only player that is expendable on the blue line.

As for Braun, I'm sorry but unless there are personnel changes or some injuries, you can't give him more time after the deadline or in the playoffs. Anybody thinking that moving or sitting Wallin is actually going to happen is not being realistic. Wallin is going to play and that is just the way it's going to be so address things around him.


Last edited by Pinkfloyd: 12-27-2010 at 09:55 PM.
Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 11:16 PM
  #38
param
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,033
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
I think if you put Wallin in the role and minutes that Huskins is in, you'd see similar results. Wallin sucks when he's being overplayed and outmatched. They're redundant because neither are particularly strong defensively. Neither are particularly strong at moving the puck. Both are at their best in the third pairing.

As for Braun, I'm sorry but unless there are personnel changes or some injuries, you can't give him more time after the deadline or in the playoffs. Anybody thinking that moving or sitting Wallin is actually going to happen is not being realistic. Wallin is going to play and that is just the way it's going to be so address things around him.
Huskins was one of the most responsible players last season, and has definitely been this year. I do not understand where that assertion comes from about him being bad at defense.

Wallin and Huskins are pretty much in the same role, both guys are averaging almost the same minutes (Huskins - 16:16, Wallin - 15:53).

Why is sitting Wallin not realistic? Because McLellen is so fixated on Wallin that he'll keep playing him no matter what? What makes you so certain that he will keep playing even if six other defensemen are playing better? The coaching staff made a very smart decision to send down Braun. Let him refine his defensive game then bring him up towards the final stretch and the playoffs. Thats when we'll probably see Wallin as the odd man out (barring any injuries).

param is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 11:30 PM
  #39
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by param View Post
Huskins was one of the most responsible players last season, and has definitely been this year. I do not understand where that assertion comes from about him being bad at defense.

Wallin and Huskins are pretty much in the same role, both guys are averaging almost the same minutes (Huskins - 16:16, Wallin - 15:53).

Why is sitting Wallin not realistic? Because McLellen is so fixated on Wallin that he'll keep playing him no matter what? What makes you so certain that he will keep playing even if six other defensemen are playing better? The coaching staff made a very smart decision to send down Braun. Let him refine his defensive game then bring him up towards the final stretch and the playoffs.
Huskins has been responsible but that doesn't mean he's been strong. Wallin has been worse and there really isn't any doubt about that. However, they're not playing the same role. When the blue line is healthy, Wallin is seeing better competition on average and is outmatched by it. I also never said he's not bad defensively...just not strong.

Why is sitting Wallin realistic? Teams don't just bench 2.5 million dollar players. The Braun thing is evidence for that very point. Braun hasn't been worse than Wallin defensively and has contributed well offensively. There is simply no evidence to suggest that McLellan will bench Wallin anytime soon. He's never done it and likely never will. It is just ignoring reality to think that they will bench Wallin at any point during this season. If he's healthy, he's playing. Period.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2010, 11:57 PM
  #40
VP and GM
Havlat Sucks!
 
VP and GM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: at home
Country: United States
Posts: 5,245
vCash: 500
I look at this is depth on D - got to have it for the playoffs and we don't appear to
at this time. We could still make the playofs with what we have, just not going far after that.

VP and GM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2010, 12:01 AM
  #41
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 11,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Huskins has been responsible but that doesn't mean he's been strong. Wallin has been worse and there really isn't any doubt about that. However, they're not playing the same role. When the blue line is healthy, Wallin is seeing better competition on average and is outmatched by it. I also never said he's not bad defensively...just not strong.

Why is sitting Wallin realistic? Teams don't just bench 2.5 million dollar players. The Braun thing is evidence for that very point. Braun hasn't been worse than Wallin defensively and has contributed well offensively. There is simply no evidence to suggest that McLellan will bench Wallin anytime soon. He's never done it and likely never will. It is just ignoring reality to think that they will bench Wallin at any point during this season. If he's healthy, he's playing. Period.
Huskins, Wallin and Braun are in a virtual tie for the worst qualcomp on the blueline. Wallin isn't seeing better competition. That ended early in the year.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2010, 12:07 AM
  #42
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Huskins, Wallin and Braun are in a virtual tie for the worst qualcomp on the blueline. Wallin isn't seeing better competition. That ended early in the year.
That ended because injuries hit and that hadn't changed until just now...when he's been playing again with Vlasic and seeing better competition.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2010, 12:27 AM
  #43
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 11,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
That ended because injuries hit and that hadn't changed until just now...when he's been playing again with Vlasic and seeing better competition.
They are pulling both Huskins and Wallin a lot which lowers the qualcomp. When they do, it is Vlasic/Demers (with a healthy blueline). We'll see after a couple more games. I wish behindthenet did game by game breakdowns. The other giveaway is to watch the movement of TOI on PK. Again Huskins and Wallin are seeing those minutes disappear.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2010, 12:40 AM
  #44
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
They are pulling both Huskins and Wallin a lot which lowers the qualcomp. When they do, it is Vlasic/Demers (with a healthy blueline). We'll see after a couple more games. I wish behindthenet did game by game breakdowns. The other giveaway is to watch the movement of TOI on PK. Again Huskins and Wallin are seeing those minutes disappear.
Basically, what I'm seeing is when the blue line is healthy, Huskins is still with Demers on the 3rd pairing...which is always protected in terms of matchups. Then Wallin is on the 2nd pairing with Vlasic and the pairing is just awful.

The root behind them seeing less time in those situations is their God awful puck movement. While Huskins has been better positionally than Wallin, they're equally as crappy at moving the puck and routinely give the puck away in the most ridiculous ways possible. I would gladly sit both of them for Joslin and Braun but that's just not going to happen. lol

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2010, 01:17 AM
  #45
param
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,033
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Basically, what I'm seeing is when the blue line is healthy, Huskins is still with Demers on the 3rd pairing...which is always protected in terms of matchups. Then Wallin is on the 2nd pairing with Vlasic and the pairing is just awful.

The root behind them seeing less time in those situations is their God awful puck movement. While Huskins has been better positionally than Wallin, they're equally as crappy at moving the puck and routinely give the puck away in the most ridiculous ways possible. I would gladly sit both of them for Joslin and Braun but that's just not going to happen. lol
What?! He's been one of the worst defensemen so far. Derek Joslin is the best of a really bad situation. He's one notch above Mike Moore, and that's not saying much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Huskins has been responsible but that doesn't mean he's been strong. Wallin has been worse and there really isn't any doubt about that. However, they're not playing the same role. When the blue line is healthy, Wallin is seeing better competition on average and is outmatched by it. I also never said he's not bad defensively...just not strong.

Why is sitting Wallin realistic? Teams don't just bench 2.5 million dollar players. The Braun thing is evidence for that very point. Braun hasn't been worse than Wallin defensively and has contributed well offensively. There is simply no evidence to suggest that McLellan will bench Wallin anytime soon. He's never done it and likely never will. It is just ignoring reality to think that they will bench Wallin at any point during this season. If he's healthy, he's playing. Period.
You can't rush a young player's development just because he had a decent 14 game stretch. You're not considering other factors that go along with giving minutes to a rookie. Will Braun's conditioning be a problem later on in the season? Will he be mentally weary come playoff time? With your logic we shouldn't even put any of our promising young players in the minors, hell just cut 'em loose in the NHL and see what happens. Plus Justin Braun is not the answer for the Sharks winning games (he's a welcomed addition and adds a nice offensive dynamic, but there are other, more serious, issues with the team right now).

By the way, teams do bench players making $2.5 mil/yr, they even send them to the minors.

param is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2010, 01:25 AM
  #46
drunksage
Moderator
#88: The Savior.
 
drunksage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Henderson, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 12,324
vCash: 1004
Well, at least he's used to playing on a struggling team.

drunksage is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2010, 01:28 AM
  #47
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 11,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by param View Post
What?! He's been one of the worst defensemen so far. Derek Joslin is the best of a really bad situation. He's one notch above Mike Moore, and that's not saying much.



You can't rush a young player's development just because he had a decent 14 game stretch. You're not considering other factors that go along with giving minutes to a rookie. Will Braun's conditioning be a problem later on in the season? Will he be mentally weary come playoff time? With your logic we shouldn't even put any of our promising young players in the minors, hell just cut 'em loose in the NHL and see what happens. Plus Justin Braun is not the answer for the Sharks winning games (he's a welcomed addition and adds a nice offensive dynamic, but there are other, more serious, issues with the team right now).

By the way, teams do bench players making $2.5 mil/yr, they even send them to the minors.
That one will be proven or not later in the season. An interesting stat to see is the W/L record for a player being in or out of the lineup. There was one year where it appeared that Kyle McLaren was a drag on the blueline, but the W/L record supported his place in the lineup.

My initial take is that supplanting one of Huskins or Wallin with Braun will prove out in the W/L comparison later in the year.

BTW, I agree on the conditioning issue with Braun as he only had a college schedule last year. It was maxed and with a short stint in Woostah, but it still came up short on games.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2010, 07:31 AM
  #48
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by param View Post
What?! He's been one of the worst defensemen so far. Derek Joslin is the best of a really bad situation. He's one notch above Mike Moore, and that's not saying much.



You can't rush a young player's development just because he had a decent 14 game stretch. You're not considering other factors that go along with giving minutes to a rookie. Will Braun's conditioning be a problem later on in the season? Will he be mentally weary come playoff time? With your logic we shouldn't even put any of our promising young players in the minors, hell just cut 'em loose in the NHL and see what happens. Plus Justin Braun is not the answer for the Sharks winning games (he's a welcomed addition and adds a nice offensive dynamic, but there are other, more serious, issues with the team right now).

By the way, teams do bench players making $2.5 mil/yr, they even send them to the minors.
First of all, people highly over-criticize Derek Joslin. He hasn't been the worst d-man or one of the worst. He doesn't play enough to justify such a ridiculous statement. The team hasn't scratched the surface of what they could get out of Derek Joslin but until they play him and give him a bit of a leash, it will never be seen.

As for Braun, I am definitely considering the fatigue factor but all things considered, that's a risk I'd be willing to take over proven mediocrity that you get out of Wallin and Huskins. He is actually part of the solution that the Sharks need to move towards. Mobility on the backend, a good shot from the point, and consistent offensive production. And we've already gone through what could go through with Braun in Matt Carle and he didn't have that problem his first year so it can be done if they choose to.

As for Wallin, you're only fooling yourself if you actually believe that and it makes it really difficult to give you any sort of credibility in this regard. Wallin's not going to be benched. Not now, not later, and certainly not in the playoffs. Doug Wilson simply will not allow that to happen.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2010, 11:10 AM
  #49
19sharks19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: T.O. to S.J. & back
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by param View Post
By the way, teams do bench players making $2.5 mil/yr, they even send them to the minors.
Just to quickly chime in: absolutely agree on this. This team will struggle defensively at best in the playoffs with the likes of huskins and wallin as regulars on the D. They bring absolutely nothing to the game for us except wasted salary money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
As for Braun, I am definitely considering the fatigue factor but all things considered, that's a risk I'd be willing to take over proven mediocrity that you get out of Wallin and Huskins. He is actually part of the solution that the Sharks need to move towards. Mobility on the backend, a good shot from the point, and consistent offensive production. And we've already gone through what could go through with Braun in Matt Carle and he didn't have that problem his first year so it can be done if they choose to.
P.f., I personally, completely agree with you here on Braun. Given a regular chance, we could find him to settle himself into our lineup and at the minimum, give us a heck lot more than what we get from either huskins and wallin. And at a whole lot less dollars (which would free up quite a bit for us to go out and get a solid #3 D man, if we dropped the likes of wallin and huskins unilaterally that is - possible a little extra playtime for Joslin as well if it takes a bit of time to pick up a #3, say until the trade deadine. Still a better option than those two wastes we have now).

19sharks19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2010, 11:36 AM
  #50
Hold the Pickles
Registered User
 
Hold the Pickles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: 03-K64
Country: United States
Posts: 2,871
vCash: 500
Not that this has anything to do with Langenbrunner, but...

To me Huskins is a slightly better all-around d-man than Wallin, with the edge in physical presence going to Wallin.

When the d is healthy, Husky is being paired with Demers and Wally is getting a stronger defensive partner. I don't think you can draw any conclusions concerning who management thinks is stronger defensively between Husky and Wally based on that. Its just that Husky and Demers have good chemistry, so you pair Wally with the better defensive partner and put them up against the tougher competition.

Hold the Pickles 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 02:43 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.