I'm good with that. Thornton flanked by Nash is a scary thought. But if we don't give up Pavs, Cooch, or the others from that list, what'll be the cost?
The biggest thing that worries me is that taking on Nash really does put us on a win now mode that tightens "the window"
Couture signed with a great discount because DW likely told him that he would take care of him when he had some flexibility with Marleau, Thornton, and Boyle being UFAs. Then Vlasic will be due at the very least Brent Burns type money...And just because Marleau, Thornton, and Boyle are UFAs, doesnt mean were getting rid of them, we'll likely keep them all if we can sign them at cheaper contracts. I just don't like the idea of becoming top heavy again when we will have to dump our depth players
The biggest thing that worries me is that taking on Nash really does put us on a win now mode that tightens "the window"
Couture signed with a great discount because DW likely told him that he would take care of him when he had some flexibility with Marleau, Thornton, and Boyle being UFAs. Then Vlasic will be due at the very least Brent Burns type money...And just because Marleau, Thornton, and Boyle are UFAs, doesnt mean were getting rid of them, we'll likely keep them all if we can sign them at cheaper contracts. I just don't like the idea of becoming top heavy again when we will have to dump our depth players
I don't see how it tightens the window. The window is already set around the careers of Thornton, Marleau, Boyle, and to a lesser extent, Havlat. If anything, this trade would create a new window centered around Couture, Nash, Burns, Vlasic, and Pavelski (assuming, he's not traded for Nash) once Thornton, Marleau, Boyle, and Havlat reach the end of their careers.
Just to expand upon and hopefully put an end to the discussion from the previous iteration of this thread...
Even if you don't see what I see when I watch Jack Johnson (a dude with absolutely nothing between the ears, at least in terms of how to play hockey when his team doesn't have more guys on the ice than their opponents) there's no denying the numbers; he's been dead last on the Kings in both Corsi and goals against per 60 minutes of ES time each of the past four seasons despite always receiving favorable zone starts and never facing anything more difficult than second-tier competition.
Also for a guy who's supposedly an "offensive defenseman" he finished with fewer ES points per 60 than noted dynamo Barret Jackman last season, is on a similar pace this year and, apart from 09-10, has consistently been 100th or worse among NHL d-men in that category.
The Jackets just traded their best all-around forward, one of the best two-way forwards in the league, for a Marc-Andre Bergeron clone making $4.5mil for the next 6 years. Eat your heart out, Howson.
Nah, LW is more right than wrong here. Johnson isn't nearly as good as he's perceived. Hey may improve, but I don't think it's likely he'll ever really earn the contract he has.
You are underrating Johnson while overrating Carter. At least be consistent with both.
How in the world am I underrating Johnson? Coming into this season, over the past four years, only Michael Del Zotto had been on the ice for more goals against per minute at even strength than JJ. And with MDZ's season it's safe to say Johnson has overtaken him.
He's a complete liability at even strength, there's just no denying that. And, unfortunately for Columbus and Johnson, the vast majority of the game is played at even strength.
As for Carter, here are some terrific articles on how great he was last season.
Les, I appreciate your post, but I can't have you badmouthing a good American.
Haha, fair enough.
I like Dustin Brown and I'll be happy to talk about how no one else in the league even comes close to him in terms of the ability to draw penalties once he gets traded to Detroit in a few days.
The biggest thing that worries me is that taking on Nash really does put us on a win now mode that tightens "the window"
Couture signed with a great discount because DW likely told him that he would take care of him when he had some flexibility with Marleau, Thornton, and Boyle being UFAs. Then Vlasic will be due at the very least Brent Burns type money...And just because Marleau, Thornton, and Boyle are UFAs, doesnt mean were getting rid of them, we'll likely keep them all if we can sign them at cheaper contracts. I just don't like the idea of becoming top heavy again when we will have to dump our depth players
I really like Vlasic and he is an awesome defensive dman but he is no where close to earning Burns money. Those dmen have 2-way games. Vlasic is superior on the defensive side only. It'll take between $4.5, maybe $5m to re-sign him at the top end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OnTheFence
I don't see how it tightens the window. The window is already set around the careers of Thornton, Marleau, Boyle, and to a lesser extent, Havlat. If anything, this trade would create a new window centered around Couture, Nash, Burns, Vlasic, and Pavelski (assuming, he's not traded for Nash) once Thornton, Marleau, Boyle, and Havlat reach the end of their careers.
With Nash, it does stretch out the window past 2014 and DW may be looking at that angle. If we trade for Nash and can get enough forward depth in the next 2 seasons, then we'll be fine.
I like Dustin Brown and I'll be happy to talk about how no one else in the league even comes close to him in terms of the ability to draw penalties once he gets traded to Detroit in a few days.
I like Dustin Brown and I'll be happy to talk about how no one else in the league even comes close to him in terms of the ability to draw penalties once he gets traded to Detroit in a few days.
