HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Jordan Staal V

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-27-2012, 06:34 PM
  #251
mr sidney crosby
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
They all have assets to offer. Montreal has Patches ,Tampa Purcel, Winnipeg, has Kane, Little and Bogo. It's not a question of whether they have the assets, it's whether they're willing to give up those assets. Doesn't Stamkos play center? Between him and Vinny I don't see them going after Staal.
Yeah thats what i was meaning. I don't think they'd be willing to part with the assets the penguins would want. No question that they have players that the penguins will want but are they willing.
Would you accept a deal from the canadians?
Eller(don't know if i spelled his name right, spelling isn't mean best subject)
Yannick weber
3rd overall

mr sidney crosby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 06:35 PM
  #252
DoctrSteveBrule
BrooksOrpeck
 
DoctrSteveBrule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
And what makes you believe either will happen? If anyone's getting better wingers, it'll be Crosby/Malkin before Staal would. And in order for Jordan to get more powerplay time, it would have to come at the cost of Crosby/Malkin getting less. And I don't see any coach making that decision.

That all being said, yes, even adding more powerplay time to Staal (or even just changing the role he's playing on the powerplay) or giving him better wingers wouldn't have the same impact that adding 4+ more minutes of icetime would.
this is a thread about what is going to happen to Staal. One of those options is him being moved. If he is moved and given power play time, and top 6 wingers, his production will increase. The pens aren't trading away a 3rd line center, they're trading away that guy. Thats my point.

Edit: also Bertuzzi's production increase was almost undoubtedly because of power player time. Seems like a pretty good comparison actually.

DoctrSteveBrule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 06:36 PM
  #253
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 17,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
And what makes you believe either will happen? If anyone's getting better wingers, it'll be Crosby/Malkin before Staal would. And in order for Jordan to get more powerplay time, it would have to come at the cost of Crosby/Malkin getting less. And I don't see any coach making that decision.

That all being said, yes, even adding more powerplay time to Staal (or even just changing the role he's playing on the powerplay) or giving him better wingers wouldn't have the same impact that adding 4+ more minutes of icetime would.
Jesus we're back to this. Our own coach commented at the beginning of the season that he sees Staal netting 10+ more points on a healthy Pens team, due to his improved skating after a full offseason/training camp. Simple math, that's 60.

Give him a top six role with better linemates and PP time on another team, and it's pretty reasonable to assume he can squeeze out another 5-10.

mpp9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 06:53 PM
  #254
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 22,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpp9 View Post
Jesus we're back to this. Our own coach commented at the beginning of the season that he sees Staal netting 10+ more points on a healthy Pens team, due to his improved skating after a full offseason/training camp. Simple math, that's 60.

Give him a top six role with better linemates and PP time on another team, and it's pretty reasonable to assume he can squeeze out another 5-10.
I didn't disagree with any of that. Simply that he won't be given those factors (top six role, better linemates, PP time) on the Penguins.

If he is moved to another team and put as the 2nd line center, I expect him to put up 60+ points, but it won't be because Staal "broke out" after 6 years in the league, it'll be because he was given a more offensive minded role rather than a shutdown one.

Blueline Bomber is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 06:53 PM
  #255
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
**** You, Duthie
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 42,473
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
Lecavalier put up 60+ points in his 2nd season. It didn't take him 6+ seasons to "break out".
"Break out" is a relative term. Staal's been good for 49 points ever since he was 20, and we're talking about a regular 10-15 point jump from there.

Quote:
For Doan, Bertuzzi, and the Sedins, their increase in production wasn't because they "broke out", but were simply given more icetime to produce. Going from 11-12 minutes to 16 minutes or 16 minutes to 20+.
I wonder why they got more minutes. You suppose they got it just because they aged?

Quote:
That doesn't apply to Staal, because he's already being given 20 minutes a night and won't be given much more than that when Crosby/Malkin are playing. So expecting a "break out" similar to those players is expecting the impossible.
I don't expect a breakout. It's happened.

It's just a matter of continuing it beyond the 117 games he's done it over the past 2 seasons.

Quote:
So you're left with Marleau and Thornton, both who had much more success before their "break out" 6th season than Staal has had.
Completely irrelevant. I'm not arguing that Staal will score like Thornton or even Marleau. I'm arguing that he can continue to produce at a 60-65 point pace.

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 07:02 PM
  #256
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 22,064
vCash: 500
I suppose it depends on your definition of "breakout". To me, that means a player continues to play the role he's played for a while, similar minutes, situations, etc., but is suddenly more productive in that role due to their own talents.

So Staal going from to a relatively productive 3rd line role to a more productive 1st/2nd line role isn't "breaking out", IMO. Staal staying in the 3rd line role and producing like he's playing in a 1st/2nd line role is "breaking out".

Blueline Bomber is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 07:03 PM
  #257
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 17,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
I didn't disagree with any of that. Simply that he won't be given those factors (top six role, better linemates, PP time) on the Penguins.

If he is moved to another team and put as the 2nd line center, I expect him to put up 60+ points, but it won't be because Staal "broke out" after 6 years in the league, it'll be because he was given a more offensive minded role rather than a shutdown one.
He can pot 60 pts in his role on this team. He led our team in scoring this past postseason for ****'s sake.

But he can be more than that with better linemates and legit PP minutes. That's what I'm arguing.

mpp9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 07:13 PM
  #258
Finlandia WOAT
Do U Like Quebec?
 
Finlandia WOAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Raleigh NC
Country: United States
Posts: 9,310
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rowdy Roddy Peeper View Post
Lecavalier, Thornton, Bertuzzi, Doan, Marleau, the Sedins.

Not coincidentally, almost all of them were high draft picks who came into the NHL right after the draft.
And all of them were significantly superior offensive talents than Staal who were considered chronic underachievers (save for Doan and Bertuzzi).

You can't really apply that label to Staal. There is a difference between a player who is not living up to expectations who suddenly starts doing so and a player like Staal.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Rowdy Roddy Peeper View Post
The problem is that you're talking about the "norm" for a player based on his 18-22 year old seasons. I'd be curious to know if you base norms for most players on how they produce between 18-22.
Well, when the player we are talking about is 23 years old, then yes, his norm would be based on 18-22.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rowdy Roddy Peeper View Post
Charts are nice. Except they lack the context that would illustrate Staal's PP time is for the last 30 seconds with the likes of Kennedy, Cooke, and Niskanen, and I was explicit in stating that I projected those PP totals for him in another situation.
Maybe that tells you just how the powers that be view what Staal's effectiveness on the powerplay is...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rowdy Roddy Peeper View Post
The per annum is nice, but that crazy length wasn't necessarily a plus for every bidding team, especially considering the terms he left Philly on.

More does not always equal better.
Are you joking?

Not only is LA guaranteed Mike Richards for nigh the next decade, they are also guaranteed to get some form of return on their investment if Mike Richards did not work out. They could flip him and get something back instead of losing him to FA.

The fact that Staal only has 1 year left until unrestricted free agency destroys whatever value he has. A team trading for him this offseason is guaranteed 1 year before possibly losing him. If he suffered an injury at the beginning of the season and played only 20+ games, then that team just traded a whole bunch of assets for 20 games of Jordan Staal. If Mike Richards suffered a season ending injury, then no fear, we still have 8 years.

I seriously cannot believe that this has been suggested.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rowdy Roddy Peeper View Post
Staal actually does it too. Over the past 2 years, reg. season and playoffs, Staal has scored 92 points in 117 games, which works out to an average of 64 points per 82 games.

That's not potential, that's his production over the equivalent of a season and a half.
But there are still question marks over whether he can do it over an entire regular season. And up until this point, he has not.

No person that is sound of mind is going to give up a package that Mike Richards got for a player who may, in another situation, produce more points. If you want to demand that, Staal needs to actually produce what Mike Richards produced over a regular season. Not over an arbitrary sample size.

BTW, you never answered to my claim about how Richards scored 25 more PP points than Staal despite playing only a minute more per game. Or the explanation about the strawman argument.


Last edited by Finlandia WOAT: 05-27-2012 at 09:14 PM.
Finlandia WOAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 07:15 PM
  #259
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 22,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpp9 View Post
He can pot 60 pts in his role on this team. He led our team in scoring this past postseason for ****'s sake.
He put up 9 points in 6 games. Impressive, but a rather small sample size, don't you think? There are a lot of players (much less talented than Staal) that have put up similar numbers in an equal amount of games.

If you believe he can put up 60 points playing the 3rd line role, with Crosby and Malkin healthy for most of the season, more power to you

Quote:
Originally Posted by mpp9 View Post
But he can be more than that with better linemates and legit PP minutes. That's what I'm arguing.
And again, I didn't disagree with that. I simply said those factors aren't going to be available to him playing for Pittsburgh.

Blueline Bomber is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 07:22 PM
  #260
DoctrSteveBrule
BrooksOrpeck
 
DoctrSteveBrule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
He put up 9 points in 6 games. Impressive, but a rather small sample size, don't you think? There are a lot of players (much less talented than Staal) that have put up similar numbers in an equal amount of games.
no one said he would put up 123 points in a year and continue that pace...

DoctrSteveBrule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 07:47 PM
  #261
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 17,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
He put up 9 points in 6 games. Impressive, but a rather small sample size, don't you think? There are a lot of players (much less talented than Staal) that have put up similar numbers in an equal amount of games.

If you believe he can put up 60 points playing the 3rd line role, with Crosby and Malkin healthy for most of the season, more power to you



And again, I didn't disagree with that. I simply said those factors aren't going to be available to him playing for Pittsburgh.
Apparently you think you have a better grasp on Staal's production in his role here than our coach. Staal was a back to back 49 pt player as our 3C. He's grown significantly offensively since then. Not real sure why this is difficult for you to understand.

mpp9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 08:07 PM
  #262
TheRollingPuck
Keep Calm & Corsi On
 
TheRollingPuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Moncton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,087
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpp9 View Post
Apparently you think you have a better grasp on Staal's production in his role here than our coach. Staal was a back to back 49 pt player as our 3C. He's grown significantly offensively since then. Not real sure why this is difficult for you to understand.
Value is based on impact/production. Some people don't want to pay for what Staal is worth.

TheRollingPuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 08:44 PM
  #263
jeromeo87
Registered User
 
jeromeo87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 1,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr sidney crosby View Post
IMO, shero will trade staal and martin for a legitament top 6 forward, top prospect, 3rd line center to replace staal and a 1st rounnd pick.
Who has the assets to make a trade like that?
Columbus
Wild
Toronto
Chicago
Calagry
Buffalo
IMO, Toronto has the best assets and thats where staal will end up.
The asking price for Rich Nash to NYR was at least Brandon Dubinsky, Chris Kreider, either Ryan McDonagh or Michael Del Zotto, and a first-round pick. Based on that, J.Staal+Martin is equal to Rick Nash's value?

Jordan Staal is good. Actually, forget that. Jordan Staal is really good. HOWEVER, he's not THAT good. And yeah, Martin's contract is just...no. I DO think Martin has some left in the tank, but he's simply not worth what he's being paid.

I don't think Pittsburgh can expect to meet ALL of their team needs by dealing Jordan Staal.

jeromeo87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 08:53 PM
  #264
wej20
Registered User
 
wej20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Swansea,UK
Country: Wales
Posts: 21,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeromeo87 View Post
The asking price for Rich Nash to NYR was at least Brandon Dubinsky, Chris Kreider, either Ryan McDonagh or Michael Del Zotto, and a first-round pick. Based on that, J.Staal+Martin is equal to Rick Nash's value?

Jordan Staal is good. Actually, forget that. Jordan Staal is really good. HOWEVER, he's not THAT good. And yeah, Martin's contract is just...no. I DO think Martin has some left in the tank, but he's simply not worth what he's being paid.

I don't think Pittsburgh can expect to meet ALL of their team needs by dealing Jordan Staal.
to be fair Nash isn't worth what he's being paid either. McDonagh/Del Zotto are worth a lot more than a 3rd line centre.

wej20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 08:56 PM
  #265
jeromeo87
Registered User
 
jeromeo87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 1,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wej20 View Post
to be fair Nash isn't worth what he's being paid either. McDonagh/Del Zotto are worth a lot more than a 3rd line centre.
I think you can argue McDonagh/Del Zotto's value compared to Sutter. While I think your comment is slightly ticky tacky, you have to see my point...

jeromeo87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 09:22 PM
  #266
Crosberry87
Registered User
 
Crosberry87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,976
vCash: 500
How about..

Staal
Harrington

for

Oshie
Stewart
2nd round pick 2012

Crosberry87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 09:27 PM
  #267
Ugene Malkin
Bück Dich Baby!
 
Ugene Malkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: Germany
Posts: 21,229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeromeo87 View Post
The asking price for Rich Nash to NYR was at least Brandon Dubinsky, Chris Kreider, either Ryan McDonagh or Michael Del Zotto, and a first-round pick. Based on that, J.Staal+Martin is equal to Rick Nash's value?

Jordan Staal is good. Actually, forget that. Jordan Staal is really good. HOWEVER, he's not THAT good. And yeah, Martin's contract is just...no. I DO think Martin has some left in the tank, but he's simply not worth what he's being paid.

I don't think Pittsburgh can expect to meet ALL of their team needs by dealing Jordan Staal.
The reason why Martin looked so bad is because of the system they were playing this past season doesn't suite him. His first season with the team they had to play a more balanced system where it was more defensive because of certain players being lost for the season. The forwards were coming back on the back check helping out. This past season Dan Blysma went with a more offensive approach that's well documented that they would keep the puck in the offensive zone as their defensive scheme. Now the problem with that is, they get caught a lot at the other teams blueline or just inside it on a lot of bad pinches, bad bounces that usually ended up in their net because the forwards were caught in deep forcing the offense.

Now if you put Martin back into his usual role on a team that's pushing a solid defensive game like NJD, Minny, ect... he'll look every bit worth his contract, but if they're are pushing the offensive game, that's not his forte. Martin for some reason can't comprehend offensively past the opponents blueline. He's great on the puck retrieval and getting it out of his zone if the forwards are back to give him the outlet passes. He can also carry it out well.

His biggest flaw is not being able to handle bigger players deep in his zone,(board battles) but if he gets there first he can outlet the puck.

Paul Martin is a bad fit not a bad player.

Ugene Malkin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 09:33 PM
  #268
jeromeo87
Registered User
 
jeromeo87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 1,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ugene Malkin View Post
The reason why Martin looked so bad is because of the system they were playing this past season doesn't suite him. His first season with the team they had to play a more balanced system where it was more defensive because of certain players being lost for the season. The forwards were coming back on the back check helping out. This past season Dan Blysma went with a more offensive approach that's well documented that they would keep the puck in the offensive zone as their defensive scheme. Now the problem with that is, they get caught a lot at the other teams blueline or just inside it on a lot of bad pinches, bad bounces that usually ended up in their net because the forwards were caught in deep forcing the offense.

Now if you put Martin back into his usual role on a team that's pushing a solid defensive game like NJD, Minny, ect... he'll look every bit worth his contract, but if they're are pushing the offensive game, that's not his forte. Martin for some reason can't comprehend offensively past the opponents blueline. He's great on the puck retrieval and getting it out of his zone if the forwards are back to give him the outlet passes. He can also carry it out well.

His biggest flaw is not being able to handle bigger players deep in his zone,(board battles) but if he gets there first he can outlet the puck.

Paul Martin is a bad fit not a bad player.
And for $5mil a year, I (and most others) would rather have player who can adapt when needed.

jeromeo87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 09:35 PM
  #269
Ugene Malkin
Bück Dich Baby!
 
Ugene Malkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: Germany
Posts: 21,229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeromeo87 View Post
I think you can argue McDonagh/Del Zotto's value compared to Sutter. While I think your comment is slightly ticky tacky, you have to see my point...
I agree with, wej20.

Either of those two are worth more than, Sutter.

Ugene Malkin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 09:39 PM
  #270
jeromeo87
Registered User
 
jeromeo87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 1,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ugene Malkin View Post
I agree with, wej20.

Either of those two are worth more than, Sutter.
maybe... but by how much?

Besides, look at the big picture here.. Is J.Staal and Martin worth the same (or almost the same..w/e..) as Rick Nash? The answer is no..

If the asking price for J.Staal (and Martin, even though not many want him) is a top 6 forward, top prospect, third line center, and a 1st rd pick, I think I (and I'm sure I'm not alone) would rather just trade for Nash..haha. That asking price is just silly.

jeromeo87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 09:43 PM
  #271
Ugene Malkin
Bück Dich Baby!
 
Ugene Malkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: Germany
Posts: 21,229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeromeo87 View Post
And for $5mil a year, I (and most others) would rather have player who can adapt when needed.
How many players are able to do that?

When a team needs a certain role to fill they sign or trade for someone who's geared for that particular need. That's why there are PMD's, DD's, TWD's. It's not about adapting and some are good at both, but there are far fewer of them who can do both well.

There are plenty of D-man who are geared one way whom command top dollar contracts.

Ugene Malkin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 09:46 PM
  #272
jeromeo87
Registered User
 
jeromeo87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 1,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ugene Malkin View Post
How many players are able to do that?

When a team needs a certain role to fill they sign or trade for someone who's geared for that particular need. That's why there are PMD's, DD's, TWD's. It's not about adapting and some are good at both, but there are far fewer of them who can do both well.

There are plenty of D-man who are geared one way whom command top dollar contracts.
However you shake this, Martin is making a lot of money and is coming off a bad year. That tends to scare people away. I doubt a GM is itching to get Martin, saying to himself, "Martin's a beast worth every penny.. he was just in the wrong system.. I'll willing to give up a pretty big piece to acquire that.."

Come on..

jeromeo87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 09:49 PM
  #273
TML91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 177
vCash: 500
the reason are speculating that there will be a trade bc 1st off either your coach or GM said so 2nd when you have Malkin Staal and Crosby needed to be re-signed in the next few years and most likely get pay raises. Staal will always be behind Crosby and Malkin you don't want around 20million plus locked up with in 3 guys so you mine as well get some assests while his value is high and won't screw yourself next year when you wish have made the trade where you could have got a lot of players who eaqual the amount of one of your players thats why are speculating it sucks but it's reality.

TML91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 09:54 PM
  #274
Ugene Malkin
Bück Dich Baby!
 
Ugene Malkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: Germany
Posts: 21,229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeromeo87 View Post
maybe... but by how much?

Besides, look at the big picture here.. Is J.Staal and Martin worth the same (or almost the same..w/e..) as Rick Nash? The answer is no..

If the asking price for J.Staal (and Martin, even though not many want him) is a top 6 forward, top prospect, third line center, and a 1st rd pick, I think I (and I'm sure I'm not alone) would rather just trade for Nash..haha. That asking price is just silly.
A decent bit. D-man are the hardest and most valuable commodity for the most part.

Goaltenders>>D-man>>Centers>>Wingers

It can be argued, but it's always gonna come down to supply and demand.

If you read most last post it's probably worth a bit more than just Nash.

Top 6 center and a top 4 D-man.IMO

I know I wouldn't trade them both for just Nash if that tells you anything.

Ugene Malkin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2012, 10:05 PM
  #275
Ogelthorpe
Who do you play for?
 
Ogelthorpe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 1,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Tripps View Post
And all of them were significantly superior offensive talents than Staal who were considered chronic underachievers (save for Doan and Bertuzzi).

You can't really apply that label to Staal. There is a difference between a player who is not living up to expectations who suddenly starts doing so and a player like Staal.





Well, when the player we are talking about is 23 years old, then yes, his norm would be based on 18-22.



Maybe that tells you just how the powers that be view what Staal's effectiveness on the powerplay is...




Are you joking?

Not only is LA guaranteed Mike Richards for nigh the next decade, they are also guaranteed to get some form of return on their investment if Mike Richards did not work out. They could flip him and get something back instead of losing him to FA.

The fact that Staal only has 1 year left until unrestricted free agency destroys whatever value he has. A team trading for him this offseason is guaranteed 1 year before possibly losing him. If he suffered an injury at the beginning of the season and played only 20+ games, then that team just traded a whole bunch of assets for 20 games of Jordan Staal. If Mike Richards suffered a season ending injury, then no fear, we still have 8 years.

I seriously cannot believe that this has been suggested.




But there are still question marks over whether he can do it over an entire regular season. And up until this point, he has not.

No person that is sound of mind is going to give up a package that Mike Richards got for a player who may, in another situation, produce more points. If you want to demand that, Staal needs to actually produce what Mike Richards produced over a regular season. Not over an arbitrary sample size.

BTW, you never answered to my claim about how Richards scored 25 more PP points than Staal despite playing only a minute more per game. Or the explanation about the strawman argument.

Or you could watch 1 Pens game and realize that he's not on PP 1 because of Crosby, Neal, Malkin, etc. If you really think Staal isn't on PP 1 because the organization doesn't think he is a good enough player to be on the PP, you should probably just punch yourself in the balls for being stupid, and then start watching basketball.

Ogelthorpe 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 10:11 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.