So we'll have 6 different 60 - 70+ players, correct?
That would make us, EASILY, a top-3 scoring team in the NHL, at least. We'd almost no doubt lead the league in goals scored.
Pittsburgh led the NHL in goals scored this season, and had THREE 60+ point scorers.
Boston was 2nd in goals scored, and had FOUR 60+ point scorers (but zero 70+ point scorers)
Philadelphia was 3rd in goals scored, and had TWO 60+ point scorers.
So yeah, SIX different 60-70 point scorers is ridiculous.
Last edited by BonkTastic: 06-03-2012 at 07:33 PM.
Actually we were the 4th scoring team THIS year... somehow. I don't really get it honestly.
Because a good chunk of our offence came from the blue line. It's not a coincidence that we had so much trouble scoring in the playoffs against a team that blocked everything.
Well we do have pretty good forward prospects. Anyway, by the time Zibanejad gets there Michalek and Spezza may or may not be scoring at that pace.
Regardless, there's no way in hell all of our forward prospects are going to turn out how some people are suggesting. It seems that we're going to have 4 or 5 different prospects who will at least put up 60 points on a consistent level.
So we'll have 6 different 60 - 70+ players, correct?
Zibs, Spezza, Turris, Silfverberg. Where did the other 2 come from? I expect Michalek to get 55-50ish points with reduces ice-time cause of Silfv and Zibanejad.
Regardless, there's no way in hell all of our forward prospects are going to turn out how some people are suggesting. It seems that we're going to have 4 or 5 different prospects who will at least put up 60 points on a consistent level.
Hell, nah.
Turris, Noesen, Zibanejad, Stone and Silfverberg all have a shot imo. Realistically only 1 or 2 will get there.
Turris, Noesen, Zibanejad, Stone and Silfverberg all have a shot imo. Realistically only 1 or 2 will get there.
That I can agree with.
I see Turris and Silfverberg with the largest chance of turning into 60+ point players. The others have a chance, but I'm not expecting it to come to fruition.
Because Greening was a rookie this year and Foligno is a five year veteran. What you see is what you get with Foligno, he is not going to get any better.
If a trade options becomes available that includes him I'd be very pleased to see him moved.
So what you are saying is that 24 year old Foligno has peaked?? Even though he is coming off his best season as a pro. One in which he improved many parts of his game.
But
26 year old Colin Greening hasnt??
Has Turris peaked because he has played parts of 4 seasons in the NHL??
What you see is what you get with Foligno, he is not going to get any better.
Errr, no. It is very rare that players peak at the age of 24. Especially players who've played most of their careers in the bottom 6 and still manage to consistently improve year to year.
there is no guarantee either that Michalek will ever put up the same amount of pts again or stay healthy. Hopefully we replace his pts by committee & Foligno, Regin, Silfverberg & maybe Stone and/or Zibane could help replace the lost pts.
55, 57, 60, 66 ... Michalek has done it 4 times by the age of 27.
The only 3 seasons he didn't were his rookie season and two seasons dealing with a knee injury while playing for Clouston.
Those players/prospects wouldn't be enough to support our offense the next 2 seasons if Michalek and Alfie were gone. We'd probably go from 4th best offense in the league to dead last in a hurry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Says No
yeah, i'm leery of subtracting from the top 6 since we are so thin there. if there was a deal where we're not giving up top 6 forward talent i'd do it. unfortunately i don't thing that's happening. hence, it's just a pipe dream.
I wouldn't worry about it, real hockey trades seem so rare these days that Ottawa probably isn't due to make a substantial one for another few years.
We'll just sign the 2-3 D-men we need or make a very small trade to help us along.
Quote:
Originally Posted by carsonscave
Because Greening was a rookie this year and Foligno is a five year veteran. What you see is what you get with Foligno, he is not going to get any better.
If a trade options becomes available that includes him I'd be very pleased to see him moved.
Foligno is quite a bit better than Greening offensively, despite not having the tools that Greening does. Foligno will continue to outproduce Greening throughout their careers.
Murray should try and add Butler to all deals, and forward the other GM relevant HF threads from when he was good that one time.
He's still talented and a hot streak could land him the extended shot he'd need on a scoring line. It's not out of the realm of possibility that he puts up a 20 goal, 40 point season next year.
I'd trade him for a young, bottom pairing D-man if possible because we need D-men much more than forwards and I don't believe that Butler would play a prominent role on a playoff team. However, I don't think that his career is over as some people here all of a sudden seem to believe.
I definitely agree with Trent here:
Any move Murray makes should be focused on improving defense (except the draft: go BPA). Our forward group needs work but that's why Murray drafted all those forwards.
Our defense is a trainwreck waiting to happen: something needs to be done ASAP.
I definitely agree with Trent here:
Any move Murray makes should be focused on improving defense (except the draft: go BPA). Our forward group needs work but that's why Murray drafted all those forwards.
Our defense is a trainwreck waiting to happen: something needs to be done ASAP.
It's not great but it's not a train wreck either
We got our top 2: EK, Cowen
2nd pairing: Phillips + ???
Bottom 2: Gilroy, Carkner, Wiercioch, Claesson, Borowiecki, others...
We are ok for this year; we need to replace both of our 2nd pairing within the next 3 years. one at a time
One UFA signing and one timely trade should do it. We need to give our 1st round pick of 2012 a couple years in the minors, he should come in to replace Phillips.
