HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Ottawa Senators
Notices

LOCKOUT GAME: Pretend there is a new expansion team... Who do you protect?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-05-2012, 12:10 AM
  #26
saskriders
ColinGreening's#1fan
 
saskriders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Calgary/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,434
vCash: 1322
Here is a possibility.

Don't protect Anderson, that way you can get the extra forwards and defence, but still have to young goalies in the system and roll Bishop as the starter

saskriders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2012, 12:14 AM
  #27
CanadianHockey
On the Alfie Wagon
 
CanadianHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: uOttawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,303
vCash: 2391
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
Here is a possibility.

Don't protect Anderson, that way you can get the extra forwards and defence, but still have to young goalies in the system and roll Bishop as the starter
I'd rather go with the proven starter (Andy) over the backup who has a chance at becoming a starter.

__________________
CanadianHockey________ __ __________Sens, Oilers, and Team Canada
CanadianHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2012, 12:16 AM
  #28
HavlatMach9
Registered User
 
HavlatMach9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,789
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
Here is a possibility.

Don't protect Anderson, that way you can get the extra forwards and defence, but still have to young goalies in the system and roll Bishop as the starter
I would rather protect Anderson even if he had one year remaining on his contract than go with an uncertain goalie, anything to avoid a disastrous season.

HavlatMach9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2012, 12:18 AM
  #29
saskriders
ColinGreening's#1fan
 
saskriders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Calgary/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,434
vCash: 1322
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianHockey View Post
I'd rather go with the proven starter (Andy) over the backup who has a chance at becoming a starter.
Yeah, but we can't but all our hopes in Lehner, not to mention Anderson is starting to get old, and has had some bad years already. Not saying it would be ideal, or the first thing to come to mind, but it is definitely and option in my opinion.

saskriders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2012, 12:48 AM
  #30
HavlatMach9
Registered User
 
HavlatMach9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,789
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
Yeah, but we can't but all our hopes in Lehner, not to mention Anderson is starting to get old, and has had some bad years already. Not saying it would be ideal, or the first thing to come to mind, but it is definitely and option in my opinion.
Goalies can play for a long time. I think it's the opposite, if you have complete confidence in Lehner, then getting rid of Anderson would be an option, but by keeping him you know you have a good goalie, and you can sign him again.

HavlatMach9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2012, 12:55 AM
  #31
CanadianHockey
On the Alfie Wagon
 
CanadianHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: uOttawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,303
vCash: 2391
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
Yeah, but we can't but all our hopes in Lehner, not to mention Anderson is starting to get old, and has had some bad years already. Not saying it would be ideal, or the first thing to come to mind, but it is definitely and option in my opinion.
Putting Anderson up on the unprotected list puts even more pressure on Lehner, though. Andy is the only established starter of the trio. Get rid of him, suddenly you're forced to either rush Lehner or overplay Bishop. Get rid of Bishop, you just have to find a decent backup and let Lawson compete with Lehner this year, and then Driedger and Brassard in the future.

Look at Toronto if you want an example of a team that elected to forgo a veteran in favour of two young, unproven goalies.

CanadianHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2012, 06:01 AM
  #32
internetdotcom
11 + 15 + 19 = 666
 
internetdotcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Capital O
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,265
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to internetdotcom Send a message via Yahoo to internetdotcom
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianHockey View Post
Putting Anderson up on the unprotected list puts even more pressure on Lehner, though. Andy is the only established starter of the trio. Get rid of him, suddenly you're forced to either rush Lehner or overplay Bishop. Get rid of Bishop, you just have to find a decent backup and let Lawson compete with Lehner this year, and then Driedger and Brassard in the future.

Look at Toronto if you want an example of a team that elected to forgo a veteran in favour of two young, unproven goalies.
This.

We finally have stability in net for the first time really in our modern history, and some want to throw that away? The plan always was Andy for now, and Lehner for the future. I like Bishop, and think he will have a good career, but had Andy not went down last year, we wouldn't have traded for him. Would I like to have all 3? Absolutely. But in the OP's scenario, we're pretty much guaranteed to lose one, so why not stay with the plan set out already? Its working well so far.

As for me, I'd go with protecting :

Anderson

Karlsson
Cowen
Methot
Phillips
Lundin

Spezza
Michalek
Alfie
Turris
Latendresse
Neil
Greening
Smith
Regin

If Alfie retires, I'd also protect Condra (PK specialist).

internetdotcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2012, 11:26 AM
  #33
JoeSakic
Registered User
 
JoeSakic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,198
vCash: 500
I'd leave Andy unprotected (he has two years left after this deal).

If the goalie options are plentiful you may not lose him...I'm looking at you Vancouver.

JoeSakic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2012, 02:01 PM
  #34
CanadianHockey
On the Alfie Wagon
 
CanadianHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: uOttawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,303
vCash: 2391
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeSakic View Post
I'd leave Andy unprotected (he has two years left after this deal).

If the goalie options are plentiful you may not lose him...I'm looking at you Vancouver.
Do we want to be stuck with Luongo's cap hit if there's no cap rollback?

CanadianHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2012, 02:44 PM
  #35
JoeSakic
Registered User
 
JoeSakic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,198
vCash: 500
I'm suggesting in this hypothetical scenario that the Quebec franchise may much rather prefer to pick up a Luongo than a Craig Anderson.

JoeSakic 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 03:03 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.