HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Notices

Daymond Langkow

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-06-2012, 02:03 PM
  #1
Boose30
Registered User
 
Boose30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Niagara Falls
Country: United States
Posts: 280
vCash: 500
Daymond Langkow

idk if we're still looking to fill a center hole or if we're gunna be going with one of the G's but this guy hasn't been all too bad. If we could sign him for half of what he was worth last year i'd be content with it. He puts up about the same numbers on average that Hecht use to and had a good playoff, could be a good vet to have. Other reason id be interested in him is that he could quite possibly entice Doan to sign here if those two had a good relationship in phoenix and if we're still looking into getting him.....


thoughts???

Boose30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 02:06 PM
  #2
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 4,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boose30 View Post
idk if we're still looking to fill a center hole or if we're gunna be going with one of the G's but this guy hasn't been all too bad. If we could sign him for half of what he was worth last year i'd be content with it. He puts up about the same numbers on average that Hecht use to and had a good playoff, could be a good vet to have. Other reason id be interested in him is that he could quite possibly entice Doan to sign here if those two had a good relationship in phoenix and if we're still looking into getting him.....


thoughts???
It's usually a non-starter when you suggest players gets signed for 50% of what they made the prior year.

SackTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 02:21 PM
  #3
Rivet52
Sabres & Blackhawks
 
Rivet52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,826
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rivet52
I wouldn't be opposed to it, but I might rather try for Arnott first. I think if we can't get Arnott, we'll have to resort to guys like Langkow, Morrison, or maybe even re-signing Hecht at this point. If we don't make a trade, there's really not a lot left.

Rivet52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 02:23 PM
  #4
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 55,965
vCash: 500
Awards:
I'd rather they try for Moore at $1.25-1.5M for two or three years than Langkow.

__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle
Chainshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 02:23 PM
  #5
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,833
vCash: 500
Is he worth 4x the cap hit of a Dominic Moore? I tend to think not.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 02:38 PM
  #6
Better Call Saul
Registered User
 
Better Call Saul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 5,145
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechsack View Post
It's usually a non-starter when you suggest players gets signed for 50% of what they made the prior year.
Not in this case. What Langkow makes next season shouldn't come anywhere close to the $4.5 million he raked in last season, which was the final year of a big contract he signed with Calgary in 2008. Langkow is a $2 million player at this point, give or take a few hundred thousand.

Better Call Saul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 03:33 PM
  #7
Boose30
Registered User
 
Boose30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Niagara Falls
Country: United States
Posts: 280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chainshot View Post
I'd rather they try for Moore at $1.25-1.5M for two or three years than Langkow.
thats not a bad option, do you think the team would actually resign a guy that they let go a couple years ago?

Boose30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 04:04 PM
  #8
heartsabres*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Budapest
Country: Hungary
Posts: 1,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boose30 View Post
idk if we're still looking to fill a center hole or if we're gunna be going with one of the G's but this guy hasn't been all too bad. If we could sign him for half of what he was worth last year i'd be content with it. He puts up about the same numbers on average that Hecht use to and had a good playoff, could be a good vet to have. Other reason id be interested in him is that he could quite possibly entice Doan to sign here if those two had a good relationship in phoenix and if we're still looking into getting him.....


thoughts???
Smallish center with a beat up body who probably wont make it through the season. I will pass

heartsabres* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 07:49 PM
  #9
goooal
Registered User
 
goooal's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 579
vCash: 500
I was just looking at Langkow as an option a few days back. It seems like he still brings solid defensive play to the table, and he's obviously a veteran. Can he fill a third line role for the team? He wouldn't be worse than anything we have, and I think he's still got it in him. Last year was a rough one for him, his mother died and he broke a hand (I think?). Before that went down he had 8 points in 13 games. The whole year he kept up his defensive play, though, and that's what really makes him attractive to me. We need someone for one to two years to fill that spot. He can, and fairly affordably I think.

Make it happen Darcy.

goooal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 08:43 PM
  #10
Layne Staley
Registered User
 
Layne Staley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,877
vCash: 500
Why not Take a shot at Langkow, because Dom Moore is not coming here. Production wise he is a smaller less physical Gaustad.... Better then a 4th line center but definitely not good enough for the 3rd line. And also remember Kaleta hates Dom Moore he called him quote on quote "A ****ing nerd" which was hilarious as it was heard on the broadcast unedited

Layne Staley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 09:18 PM
  #11
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Layne Staley View Post
Why not Take a shot at Langkow, because Dom Moore is not coming here. Production wise he is a smaller less physical Gaustad.... Better then a 4th line center but definitely not good enough for the 3rd line. And also remember Kaleta hates Dom Moore he called him quote on quote "A ****ing nerd" which was hilarious as it was heard on the broadcast unedited
who doesn't kaleta say that **** to, though?

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 09:33 PM
  #12
Sabretip
Registered User
 
Sabretip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 7,817
vCash: 500
If Regier's looking at any of the 3 UFA centers and ranking them:

Size:
1. Arnott, 6'-5" 225
2. Moore, 6'-0" 195
3. Langkow, 5'-11" 195

Age:
1. Moore, 32
2. Langkow, 36
3. Arnott, 38

Offense (2011-12):
1. Arnott, 17-17-34 in 72 GP
2. Langkow, 11-19-30 in 73 GP
3. Moore, 4-21-25 in 79 GP

Specialty-teams (2011-12):
1. Arnott, 6-8-14 on PP / 0-0-0 on PK
2. Langkow, 1-2-3 on PP / 0-1-1 on PK
3. Moore, 0-3-3 on PP / 0-1-1 on PK

Face-off ability (2011-12):
1. Moore, 55.0%
2. Arnott, 50.3%
3. Langkow, 44.4%

Hits (2011-12):
1. Langkow, 87
2. Moore, 52
3. Arnott, 24

Blocked shots (2011-12):
1. Langkow, 50
2. Moore, 23
3. Arnott, 13

Takeaways / Giveaways (2011-12):
1. Langkow, 34 / 21 (+13)
2. Arnott, 17 / 11 (+6)
3. Moore, 25 / 20 (+5)

Avg. TOI (2011-12):
1. Langkow, 15:45
2. Moore, 15:32
3. Arnott, 14:04

Salary (2011-12):
1. Langkow, $4.5M
2. Arnott, $2.9M
3. Moore, $1.2M

Playoff experience (career):
1. Arnott, 122 GP (1 Cup win)
2. Langkow, 75 GP (No Cup win)
3. Moore, 44 GP (No Cup win)

If Regier is worried about adding size, Arnott wins - although he's the least physical of the 3.

If Regier wants offensive capability, Arnott or Langkow can offer a little more than Moore - although Langkow's ES production last year exceeded Arnott's.

If Regier wants a face-off ace and defensively-responsible player who can handle PK duties, Moore is an obvious choice over the other 2.

If Regier wants some grit and physicality, Langkow showed more of both last season than the other two.

If Regier wants to keep the dollars in check, all three may recognize the lack of bargaining power at their ages - although Moore is the least marquee of the 3.

All three come with recent baggage from last season:
- Arnott's tenure in St. Louis ended poorly when he skipped a practice while injured after Hitchcock scratched him.
- Langkow started off like gangbusters before the personal tragedy of his mom's death took the steam out of his game.
- Moore dealt with an in-season trade and cancer to his wife, and may not want to move from CA.

All in all, if I had to choose from the 3, I'd take Langkow or Moore over Arnott.

If the general assumption here is the "sandpaper on each line" approach, and McCormick is destined to be the 4th line center and Ott to play LW, we can anticipate Pominville and Leino being the wingers for the UFA center TBD. Personally, I think whatever defensive shortcomings that Langkow may have (and he used to have good two-way instincts during his Calgary years), Pominville would seem to be a safe insurance plan - as well as one to take the face-offs that Langkow isn't great at. Leino would be the playmaker on the line - so Langkow's grit and edge could fit well IMO.


Last edited by Sabretip: 08-10-2012 at 01:13 AM. Reason: Takeaways/Giveaways resorted
Sabretip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 11:51 AM
  #13
Wisent42
Registered User
 
Wisent42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Södertälje
Country: Sweden
Posts: 654
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretip View Post
If Regier's looking at any of the 3 UFA centers and ranking them:

Size:
1. Arnott, 6'-5" 225
2. Moore, 6'-0" 195
3. Langkow, 5'-11" 195

Age:
1. Moore, 32
2. Langkow, 36
3. Arnott, 38

Offense (2011-12):
1. Arnott, 17-17-34 in 72 GP
2. Langkow, 11-19-30 in 73 GP
3. Moore, 4-21-25 in 79 GP

Specialty-teams (2011-12):
1. Arnott, 6-8-14 on PP / 0-0-0 on PK
2. Langkow, 1-2-3 on PP / 0-1-1 on PK
3. Moore, 0-3-3 on PP / 0-1-1 on PK

Face-off ability (2011-12):
1. Moore, 55.0%
2. Arnott, 50.3%
3. Langkow, 44.4%

Hits (2011-12):
1. Langkow, 87
2. Moore, 52
3. Arnott, 24

Blocked shots (2011-12):
1. Langkow, 50
2. Moore, 23
3. Arnott, 13

Giveaways / Takeaways (2011-12):
1. Moore, 20 / 25 (-5)
2. Arnott, 11 / 17 (-6)
3. Langkow, 21 / 34 (-13)

Avg. TOI (2011-12):
1. Langkow, 15:45
2. Moore, 15:32
3. Arnott, 14:04

Salary (2011-12):
1. Langkow, $4.5M
2. Arnott, $2.9M
3. Moore, $1.2M

Playoff experience (career):
1. Arnott, 122 GP (1 Cup win)
2. Langkow, 75 GP (No Cup win)
3. Moore, 44 GP (No Cup win)

If Regier is worried about adding size, Arnott wins - although he's the least physical of the 3.

If Regier wants offensive capability, Arnott or Langkow can offer a little more than Moore - although Langkow's ES production last year exceeded Arnott's.

If Regier wants a face-off ace and defensively-responsible player who can handle PK duties, Moore is an obvious choice over the other 2.

If Regier wants some grit and physicality, Langkow showed more of both last season than the other two.

If Regier wants to keep the dollars in check, all three may recognize the lack of bargaining power at their ages - although Moore is the least marquee of the 3.

All three come with recent baggage from last season:
- Arnott's tenure in St. Louis ended poorly when he skipped a practice while injured after Hitchcock scratched him.
- Langkow started off like gangbusters before the personal tragedy of his mom's death took the steam out of his game.
- Moore dealt with an in-season trade and cancer to his wife, and may not want to move from CA.

All in all, if I had to choose from the 3, I'd take Langkow or Moore over Arnott.

If the general assumption here is the "sandpaper on each line" approach, and McCormick is destined to be the 4th line center and Ott to play LW, we can anticipate Pominville and Leino being the wingers for the UFA center TBD. Personally, I think whatever defensive shortcomings that Langkow may have (and he used to have good two-way instincts during his Calgary years), Pominville would seem to be a safe insurance plan - as well as one to take the face-offs that Langkow isn't great at. Leino would be the playmaker on the line - so Langkow's grit and edge could fit well IMO.
I've been on the Arnott bandwagon for a while, but you make a good case sir. What do we know about Langkows leadership skills? Because I think a veteran center is important to help the development of Ennis and Hodgson. I also have a feeling that that guidance has been missing in the locker room since Grier departured. So is Langkow, Arnott or Moore the guy for that?

I took a quick look at their playoff production and it looks like Langkow and Arnott are pretty equal there too.

On a sidenote: I've never really understood the fixation with size. I'd rather have a small player who hits (Gerbe) than a big player who doesn't (Boyes). The hitting number therefor suggests that I should like Langkow over Arnott. I'll have to think about it.

Wisent42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 03:15 PM
  #14
ManuelCalavera
La-La-La-Locked Out
 
ManuelCalavera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 433
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisent42 View Post
I've been on the Arnott bandwagon for a while, but you make a good case sir. What do we know about Langkows leadership skills? Because I think a veteran center is important to help the development of Ennis and Hodgson.
Is Arnott really that guy though? He carved out a nice career for himself, but he's never been considered a great leader. He is not a two way player, and has often been accused of lacking drive. He wore the C in Nashville, but many were underwhelmed by his tenure there. Hitchcock benched him for missing a practice last year, and St. Louis, a team loaded with young talent, opted to walk away from him.

ManuelCalavera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 03:37 PM
  #15
Wisent42
Registered User
 
Wisent42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Södertälje
Country: Sweden
Posts: 654
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ManuelCalavera View Post
Is Arnott really that guy though?
I don't know. That is why I'm asking.

Wisent42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2012, 01:52 AM
  #16
Sabretip
Registered User
 
Sabretip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 7,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisent42 View Post
What do we know about Langkows leadership skills? Because I think a veteran center is important to help the development of Ennis and Hodgson. I also have a feeling that that guidance has been missing in the locker room since Grier departured. So is Langkow, Arnott or Moore the guy for that?
Many media reports out of Phoenix that I've read often characterized Doan and Langkow having similar influences in the locker room, both as outspoken leaders that were well-respected and liked by their teammates. Langkow's work ethic often was praised when his skillset and skating started to diminish.

I very much took Regier's words earlier this summer as wanting to bring in a veteran center for the very reason you cited - not just as a mentor but also as insurance if either of the two kids struggle offensively. I don't know that any of the 3 UFA options help in that second regard....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisent42 View Post
On a sidenote: I've never really understood the fixation with size. I'd rather have a small player who hits (Gerbe) than a big player who doesn't (Boyes).
I'm afraid that Regier may feel compelled to replace the size at center that he lost when Gaustad was traded, and that he'll try to do so with a short-term player who can bridge the gap til Grigorenko or Girgensons are ready. That's the only reason why I think he'd pursue Arnott.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ManuelCalavera View Post
He carved out a nice career for himself, but he's never been considered a great leader.

Hitchcock benched him for missing a practice last year, and St. Louis, a team loaded with young talent, opted to walk away from him.
The Blues' beat writer, Jeremy Rutherford, as well as Blues color man Darren Pang, both commented late in the season as the playoffs approached that Arnott was a vocal presence in the lockerroom along with Langenbrunner and influential with the younger players.

Whether the Blues walked away from re-signing him because that wasn't the case or because Arnott and Hitchcock butted heads is debatable. Some of the fans on the Blues MB explained that the incident late in the year was a case where Arnott was fighting through an injury and wanted to play. Hitchcock sat him out as a precaution. Arnott was upset about not being allowed to play through the injury so when Hitchcock expected him to participate in practices despite the injury, Arnott argued that if he wasn't healthy enough to play, he wasn't healthy enough to practice.

Sabretip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2012, 06:36 AM
  #17
Digable5
Registered User
 
Digable5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: B-Lo
Country: United States
Posts: 3,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretip View Post

Giveaways / Takeaways (2011-12):
1. Moore, 20 / 25 (-5)
2. Arnott, 11 / 17 (-6)
3. Langkow, 21 / 34 (-13)
Langkow had 13 more takeaways than he had giveaways. Wouldn't you put him at the top of the list at +13?

Digable5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2012, 01:55 PM
  #18
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 55,965
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Layne Staley View Post
Why not Take a shot at Langkow, because Dom Moore is not coming here. Production wise he is a smaller less physical Gaustad.... Better then a 4th line center but definitely not good enough for the 3rd line. And also remember Kaleta hates Dom Moore he called him quote on quote "A ****ing nerd" which was hilarious as it was heard on the broadcast unedited
And Kaleta called Ott a ****ing ****** bag too and they wound up fighting. It's part of Kaleta's role.

They need a defensive center, not another scoring line guy. It's more than production while they transition to Grigensons and Girgorenko.

Chainshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2012, 01:13 AM
  #19
Sabretip
Registered User
 
Sabretip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 7,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digable5 View Post
Langkow had 13 more takeaways than he had giveaways. Wouldn't you put him at the top of the list at +13?
Yes - good catch. Edited now....

Sabretip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2012, 01:37 AM
  #20
Sabretip
Registered User
 
Sabretip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 7,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chainshot View Post
They need a defensive center, not another scoring line guy.
I think there are two sides to the coin:

- The Sabres struggled to score last year and relied heavily on two players for most of its offense. The Roy-Ott traded helped in a lot of ways but offense wasn't one of them. Maybe the young duo of Hodgson and Ennis end up producing over a full season like top 6 forwards. Maybe Foligno adds more offense over a full season. Maybe Stafford, Leino and Gerbe all bounce back while Vanek and Pominville produce at least as much as they did last year. Maybe Myers and Ehrhoff contribute more offense from the blueline. And maybe injuries don't decimate the roster like they did last season. But there are too many "maybe's" on the current roster to feel comfortable with the Sabres' offense going into the season.

- The Sabres also struggled to hold leads, contain the top lines of other teams, win face-offs and were very mediocre killing penalties. Adding Ott will help in many of those areas but balanced against the departures of Roy, Gaustad and Hecht - all of whom were relied upon in those areas - the current roster looks less capable than they were last year. Maybe Hodgson's two-way game develops, maybe the top 4 defenders will have superlative years and Miller will rebound.

Assuming the offense is in OK shape to produce more, having a defensive center for the 3rd line makes perfect sense. But I'm not willing to assume it's OK as is and am inclined to lean more towards adding a player to contribute on the scoresheet rather than hope the Sabres can win more 1-0 and 2-1 games.

Sabretip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2012, 09:26 AM
  #21
Husko
Registered User
 
Husko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country: Ireland
Posts: 3,046
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chainshot View Post
And Kaleta called Ott a ****ing ****** bag too and they wound up fighting. It's part of Kaleta's role.

They need a defensive center, not another scoring line guy. It's more than production while they transition to Grigensons and Girgorenko.
Honestly, they need a center.

I'll take any of these three, hell I'd prefer two.

Husko 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 10:45 AM.

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.