HFBoards

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

2012 Trade Deadline

View Poll Results: Will the Stars do anything between now and the trade deadline?
Stars make at least one big move 21 35.00%
Stars make one or more small moves 32 53.33%
Stars do nothing 7 11.67%
Voters: 60. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-09-2012, 04:52 PM
  #76
catters078
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 3,064
vCash: 500
Trade Grossman for a late 1st or early second.

Use the pick to acquire Suter or Webers rights in the off season??

catters078 is offline  
Old
01-09-2012, 04:56 PM
  #77
piqued
Registered User
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 32,014
vCash: 3722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozen Failure View Post
You know me, I was completely devastated when we traded Niskanen. It was an absurd overpayment for Goligoski.

Gonna have to agree with Cin, still. Grossman hasn't been "completely terrible".

Souray has been pedestrian lately because they play a tight point against him and we can't move the puck fast enough to make space for him (can of worms opened)

Pardy has been downright terrible except for that one game... where he was paired with Grossman. Robidas has been consistently doing the wrong thing defensively (passing to no one, getting obliterated going for a hit, pinching at inopportune times, playing the shooter on a 2 on 1)
Pointing out that some of our other defensemen also suck doesn't excuse Grossman. The idea is to get better at every roster spot. The only 2 defensemen this year who have been above-average in my mind are Larsen and Daley. Goligoski, Fistric, and Souray have been mediocre. Grossman and Robidas have been a drag on the team. Pardy is bad and probably shouldn't be in the NHL.

Grossman and Fistric are too similar. We only need one guy in that particular mold and Fistric does it better and meaner. Plus he's not a UFA.

I wish it hadn't come to this and the D pairs had been fixed long ago putting people in positions to succeed. But it hasn't happened and the coaching staff shows no desire to fix it, so, here we are.

piqued is offline  
Old
01-09-2012, 05:16 PM
  #78
Sports
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 3,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by catters078 View Post
Trade Grossman for a late 1st or early second.

Use the pick to acquire Suter or Webers rights in the off season??
3. ????
4. PROFIT!

Sports is offline  
Old
01-09-2012, 06:17 PM
  #79
MetalGodAOD*
Star Rangers
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,360
vCash: 500
I will say that as a fan base, we tend to over-criticize our own players. All fan bases on HFboards do it, and I'm guilty of it just as much. We tend to think we'd be better off with any player but our own. Remember how we responded to Pardy for Woywitka? We thought anyone could be better than Woy-boy, and were in for a rude treat. The same scenario exists for replacing Grossman, Robidas, etc.

I will say that I give more respect for the players who do what they can with their skills (Daley, Grossman, Fistric) and keep their game simple as opposed to players like Robidas who try to be superman and do everything, usually poorly. Personally I wouldn't be too worked up if we re-signed Grossman, he was our top pairing D-man for 2 years, and with some upgrades could be a fine second pairing guy. He's not wonderful and has his flaws, but so does any D-man. You can even go on Chicago and Boston's boards (well maybe not Boston) and see them railing on their D-men and wanting to trade for upgrades. At a certain point you have to realize that there aren't 100 perfect D-men in the NHL, and you have to take some of the bad. If we can get what Grossman brings for a few years at a cheap extension until Nemeth is ready, I'm OK with it. Because any replacement isn't very likely to be an 100% upgrade.

Quote:
Our D is actually pretty decent now. Unfortunately it suffers because half of our forwards can't back check and make their own chances without help from the back. Not the D's problem.
I do take issue with your line of thinking. So the D-men don't suck because the Forwards aren't backchecking, but the Forwards are supposed to be good without activating D-men? Your thinking is extremely archaic and not what wins championships in today's NHL. You need a wide array of balanced and smart defensemen who know when to activate and when to fall back. That's why hockey IQ > all other skills, and why D-men coaching is so important. I'm not a fan of Jerrad for the record.

MetalGodAOD* is offline  
Old
01-09-2012, 06:38 PM
  #80
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,637
vCash: 500
the biggest annoyance I have with Grossman is how passive he usually is in front of his own net. He'll generally try to defend guys with his stick when pushing and shoving would be the better route. He basically plays like we just came out of the lock out and you arent allowed to touch a guy in front of the net without getting a penalty. The next most annoying things is all the times he has a guy lined up and he chooses not to hit them. I don't expect him to be laying guys out like Fistric, but if he is right there he needs to take the body.

txomisc is offline  
Old
01-09-2012, 06:47 PM
  #81
Frozen Failure
Best Threadkiller
 
Frozen Failure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,817
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Frozen Failure Send a message via Yahoo to Frozen Failure
Thank you UP.

Daley-Grossman is a quite adequate 2nd pair. If one or the other were a RH instead, it would be gravy, but they're both good enough to play 2nd pair minutes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by txomisc View Post
the biggest annoyance I have with Grossman is how passive he usually is in front of his own net. He'll generally try to defend guys with his stick when pushing and shoving would be the better route. He basically plays like we just came out of the lock out and you arent allowed to touch a guy in front of the net without getting a penalty. The next most annoying things is all the times he has a guy lined up and he chooses not to hit them. I don't expect him to be laying guys out like Fistric, but if he is right there he needs to take the body.
All you gotta do is shut down your guy in front of the net. And Grossman hitting guys usually ends up with the other guy crumpled in a corner and Grossman getting mugged. He's already a bit of a penalty magnet, he doesn't need to do anything else to draw attention from the refs.


Last edited by Frozen Failure: 01-09-2012 at 07:01 PM.
Frozen Failure is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 06:59 AM
  #82
Bennrocks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,078
vCash: 500
Mac Engel on why we should trade for Rick Nash... will he ever stop spewing crap? He acknowledges that they wouldn't want any of our veterans and then continues to write this article? He acts as if we have players to give up to make this trade not named Benn or Eriksson.

Bennrocks is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 09:47 AM
  #83
BeaverSports
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bennrocks View Post
Mac Engel on why we should trade for Rick Nash... will he ever stop spewing crap? He acknowledges that they wouldn't want any of our veterans and then continues to write this article? He acts as if we have players to give up to make this trade not named Benn or Eriksson.
Rick Nash would be an excellent addition, though, you're right, probably not attainable. I don't think I'd downplay the value a veteran like a Ribeiro or a Morrow might have on a younger team - heck, even a Robidas - if they play a style that suits them, and Bachman would hold some value. I think you'd probably have to gut your depth to pull it off though.

It's funny, Engel says guys like that won't get it done, but yet feels the Stars have to make a play for Nash. Would be nice if he decided to explain how he figured that could happen.

BeaverSports is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 10:47 AM
  #84
ScubaSteve*
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeaverSports View Post
Rick Nash would be an excellent addition, though, you're right, probably not attainable. I don't think I'd downplay the value a veteran like a Ribeiro or a Morrow might have on a younger team - heck, even a Robidas - if they play a style that suits them, and Bachman would hold some value. I think you'd probably have to gut your depth to pull it off though.

It's funny, Engel says guys like that won't get it done, but yet feels the Stars have to make a play for Nash. Would be nice if he decided to explain how he figured that could happen.
I'd offer a package of any two of Morrow, Ribeiro, and Robidas, plus a 1st round pick.

That probably still wouldn't be enough, though.

ScubaSteve* is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 12:04 PM
  #85
Captain Awesome
Registered User
 
Captain Awesome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,076
vCash: 500
Not really a fan of Rick Nash at that gargantuan cap hit, and that he's been a loser since practically the beginning of his NHL career doesn't help the track record.

Captain Awesome is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 12:14 PM
  #86
Sony Eriksson*
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: N. Dallas/NYC
Country: Faroe Islands
Posts: 13,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome View Post
Not really a fan of Rick Nash at that gargantuan cap hit, and that he's been a loser since practically the beginning of his NHL career doesn't help the track record.
Its not like Nash has had much talent to play with.

Sony Eriksson* is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 01:22 PM
  #87
TangoMcBride
Registered User
 
TangoMcBride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Classless, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 2,488
vCash: 500
I wonder if there's any way to pry Schenn out of Philly. Grossman/Robidas, Chiasson and a 1st maybe? Hell, who knows...maybe adding Schenn would make Glennie relevant again. When looking at it from that perspective, this would be a deal that could potentially land us two top 6 players.

TangoMcBride is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 02:27 PM
  #88
piqued
Registered User
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 32,014
vCash: 3722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bennrocks View Post
Mac Engel on why we should trade for Rick Nash... will he ever stop spewing crap? He acknowledges that they wouldn't want any of our veterans and then continues to write this article? He acts as if we have players to give up to make this trade not named Benn or Eriksson.
Not that Mac Engel is any kind of credible hockey writer, or even that I'd want Rick Nash at his salary and with his questionable commitment to defense, but I'd think the Stars could get it done if they really wanted to. I mean, 1st + Campbell + Oleksiak makes Columbus listen, right? If they've finally accepted the need to rebuild from scratch, that is.

edit: Still cracks me up that Columbus has a 62 million dollar payroll. Good Lord.

piqued is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 02:30 PM
  #89
Frozen Failure
Best Threadkiller
 
Frozen Failure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,817
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Frozen Failure Send a message via Yahoo to Frozen Failure
Hey what about Iginla? I don't think he'd cost as much as Rick "Benn is my equal" Nash...

1st, Robidas, Pardy, Glennie (or something), for Iginla, Sarich?

Frozen Failure is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 02:33 PM
  #90
piqued
Registered User
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 32,014
vCash: 3722
How does that make sense for Calgary? The 1st rounder is the only appealing thing there. Why would they be acquiring a veteran defenseman when they're selling off their veteran franchise player? Why would they want Pardy back when they made the correct determination that he wasn't worthy of a spot on their team? Glennie has some value I guess, but.... Glennie.

piqued is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 02:38 PM
  #91
Bennrocks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,078
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued View Post
How does that make sense for Calgary? The 1st rounder is the only appealing thing there. Why would they be acquiring a veteran defenseman when they're selling off their veteran franchise player? Why would they want Pardy back when they made the correct determination that he wasn't worthy of a spot on their team? Glennie has some value I guess, but.... Glennie.
Well they could then turn around and sell Robidas to some one else and then Flames fans could be delusional for years about how Glennie is a "late bloomer" and then go on to realize his career will be similar to wandell's, that or we win a cup and they get their next iginla

Bennrocks is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 02:45 PM
  #92
Frozen Failure
Best Threadkiller
 
Frozen Failure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,817
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Frozen Failure Send a message via Yahoo to Frozen Failure
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued View Post
How does that make sense for Calgary? The 1st rounder is the only appealing thing there. Why would they be acquiring a veteran defenseman when they're selling off their veteran franchise player? Why would they want Pardy back when they made the correct determination that he wasn't worthy of a spot on their team? Glennie has some value I guess, but.... Glennie.
Calgary fans seemed to like Pardy from what I gathered in their Pardy signed with Dallas LOL @ 2mil thread. Calgary is run by Jay Feaster, you know, the guy who traded Richards to Dallas. Robidas might be a Staios type for Calgary... you know, who they also acquired from Edmonton. Sarich is a UFA this offseason...

I dunno, it was a suggestion.

Frozen Failure is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 03:33 PM
  #93
BeaverSports
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 865
vCash: 500
Nash makes more sense to me from a hockey standpoint than Iginla, who despite his ties to Gaglardi is probably a short-term part and the contract doesn't bother me now that the Stars have some resources. He's younger, he's got marketable skills and personality that is somewhat lost in Columbus, and he's a better defensive player than many think he is.

I don't really buy into the Nash can't win stuff either. He was a key piece in London's climb to success in the OHL and he's had his share of international success. I just think Columbus has failed him in efforts to build a supporting cast. Throughout his development, even until now, he never had the older vets ahead of or with him. Until Carter this year, it's almost been exclusively the Rick Nash show and no player can make that work. Stick Crosby there himself, I'd bet he wouldn't win either.

BeaverSports is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 03:37 PM
  #94
BeaverSports
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozen Failure View Post
Calgary is run by Jay Feaster, you know, the guy who traded Richards to Dallas.
That move was far from Feaster's decision. Ownership pretty much forced his hand. Iggy is such a big part of Calgary, on and off the ice, that unless the Flames get an incredible hockey deal or he says he wants to go for a Cup, I doubt they force a move.

BeaverSports is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 05:27 PM
  #95
LatvianTwist
Global Moderator
 
LatvianTwist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Texas A&M
Country: Latvia
Posts: 22,467
vCash: 500
Schenn for Robi, Chiasson, 1st is something I would do. He could kickstart Glennie and turn him into something, and even if he doesn't, we still get our replacement center for Ribs or can move Benn back to wing (I wouldn't want that, though).

LatvianTwist is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 05:38 PM
  #96
MetalGodAOD*
Star Rangers
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,360
vCash: 500
I don't think that'll be enough unfortunately. Schenn was the centerpiece of the Richards deal.

MetalGodAOD* is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 05:40 PM
  #97
ScubaSteve*
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,435
vCash: 500
Jay Feaster couldn't GM his way out of a paper bag. Someone might get Iginla for cheap.

ScubaSteve* is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 06:33 PM
  #98
catters078
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 3,064
vCash: 500
We cant afford Nash.

We are very dependant on our young players being the core of our future in 3-4 years.

Nash would likely cost Oleksiak, this years first 1st, Ott and another piece.

I love Nash as a player, but he isnt worth gutting our future for.

catters078 is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 06:52 PM
  #99
TangoMcBride
Registered User
 
TangoMcBride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Classless, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 2,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnholyPrince View Post
I don't think that'll be enough unfortunately. Schenn was the centerpiece of the Richards deal.
Yeah, I bet if we asked their fans, they would probably say that Oleksiak would need to be included. I'm not sure that I'd be willing to do that.

TangoMcBride is offline  
Old
01-10-2012, 11:32 PM
  #100
Sports
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 3,345
vCash: 500
It is painfully obvious this team needs an upgrade on defense.
Can it wait til' trade deadline?
I think not.

Sports is offline  
Closed Thread

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 03:57 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.