HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Dallas Stars
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

With Goligoski and Daley Returning Soon - What to do with the 8th D?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-07-2011, 01:27 PM
  #26
Frozen Failure
Best Threadkiller
 
Frozen Failure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,421
vCash: 2111
Send a message via AIM to Frozen Failure Send a message via Yahoo to Frozen Failure
Gogo-Grossman(Fistric when he's back)
Larsen-Pardy(Grossman when Fistric is back)
Souray-Daley

Shoot Robispare into the sun.

Frozen Failure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2011, 01:37 PM
  #27
Sports
bedroom eyes
 
Sports's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Futureworld
Country: United States
Posts: 3,279
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozen Failure View Post
Gogo-Grossman(Fistric when he's back)
Larsen-Pardy(Grossman when Fistric is back)
Souray-Daley

Shoot Robispare into the sun.
Goli-Larsen will be a pair for tomorrow.
And Pardy over Daley?

Sports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2011, 01:44 PM
  #28
Frozen Failure
Best Threadkiller
 
Frozen Failure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,421
vCash: 2111
Send a message via AIM to Frozen Failure Send a message via Yahoo to Frozen Failure
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undecided View Post
Goli-Larsen will be a pair for tomorrow.
And Pardy over Daley?
Are they? Well ok. And I never line my stuff up by icetime.

Goligoski-Larsen
Daley-Souray
Grossman-Pardy (Fistric when he returns?)

Trade Robidas?

Also I'm more concerned what we'll do with Morrow returning and Vincour staying up. And then Burish returning.

Ott, Benn, Eriksson, Ryder, Ribeiro, Vincour, Morrow? All vying for top 6 time? Can't break up the REV line, can't give Vincour 8 minutes a night. Going to send up sitting Petersen and Wandell and running Ott - Dowell - Burish as a "fourth" line?

Eriksson - Benn - Ryder
Morrow - Ribeiro - Vincour
Nystrom - Fiddler - Dvorak
Ott - Dowell - Burish
Petersen, Wandell

???


Last edited by Frozen Failure: 12-07-2011 at 01:53 PM.
Frozen Failure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2011, 02:27 PM
  #29
Sports
bedroom eyes
 
Sports's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Futureworld
Country: United States
Posts: 3,279
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozen Failure View Post
Are they? Well ok. And I never line my stuff up by icetime.

Goligoski-Larsen
Daley-Souray
Grossman-Pardy (Fistric when he returns?)

Trade Robidas?

Also I'm more concerned what we'll do with Morrow returning and Vincour staying up. And then Burish returning.

Ott, Benn, Eriksson, Ryder, Ribeiro, Vincour, Morrow? All vying for top 6 time? Can't break up the REV line, can't give Vincour 8 minutes a night. Going to send up sitting Petersen and Wandell and running Ott - Dowell - Burish as a "fourth" line?

Eriksson - Benn - Ryder
Morrow - Ribeiro - Vincour
Nystrom - Fiddler - Dvorak
Ott - Dowell - Burish
Petersen, Wandell

???
I doubt Ott or Burish will see 4th line time. Their points show they are better than that.
I tried to make some possible lines, but I couldn't make any decisions, other than that I would like to see...
Morrow - Benn - Eriksson
I think B&E will be much more effective with someone in front of the net causing havoc (and hopefully taking less penalties).
I really don't see the Stars going through the whole season with this much clutter. I think we will see a few more trades in the next few weeks.

Sports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2011, 02:55 PM
  #30
Frozen Failure
Best Threadkiller
 
Frozen Failure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,421
vCash: 2111
Send a message via AIM to Frozen Failure Send a message via Yahoo to Frozen Failure
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undecided View Post
I doubt Ott or Burish will see 4th line time. Their points show they are better than that.
I tried to make some possible lines, but I couldn't make any decisions, other than that I would like to see...
Morrow - Benn - Eriksson
I think B&E will be much more effective with someone in front of the net causing havoc (and hopefully taking less penalties).
I really don't see the Stars going through the whole season with this much clutter. I think we will see a few more trades in the next few weeks.
I don't see it as a fourth line. I see it as a 10-14 minute a night line, with Ott getting spot duty up the lineup to take important draws and some special teams work. This is depth. I'd be more willing to roll Ott, Dowell and Burish for 10-14 minutes a night than Petersen, Wandell and Dowell for 12-14. It keeps REV fresh, it keeps our scoring wingers fresh, and it lets us be a bit more liberal with our player selections for the PP/PK.

Frozen Failure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2011, 04:02 PM
  #31
MB94
@MBFarina94
 
MB94's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,531
vCash: 500
Gulutzan: There is a possibility Richard Bachman plays Saturday. They'll talk about it tonight. Plus: Goligoski-Larsen could stick as pair.

Looks like Larsen could be staying on the big club for awhile.

MB94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2011, 06:47 PM
  #32
BigG44
Registered User
 
BigG44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,770
vCash: 475
Quote:
Originally Posted by MB Stars View Post
Gulutzan: There is a possibility Richard Bachman plays Saturday. They'll talk about it tonight. Plus: Goligoski-Larsen could stick as pair.

Looks like Larsen could be staying on the big club for awhile.
I wasn't sure how to take that statement, but I hope that it what he meant.

It could be stick for the next couple of games though.

BigG44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2011, 07:52 PM
  #33
ginblossoms
Registered User
 
ginblossoms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to ginblossoms
Quote:
Originally Posted by MB Stars View Post
Gulutzan: There is a possibility Richard Bachman plays Saturday. They'll talk about it tonight. Plus: Goligoski-Larsen could stick as pair.

Looks like Larsen could be staying on the big club for awhile.
Larsen will remain up in Dallas at least until Fistric returns from his suspension, at which point the Stars would have 8 defensemen and 14 forwards (including Burish).

After this most recent stint with the big club, Larsen indeed seems ready to stick in the NHL. That said, I still think that due to veteran contracts and the inability to send anyone else down, the most practical thing to do is send Larsen down to Austin assuming a fully healthy roster. He can develop further and provide a good contingency plan in the event of more injuries.

It is this injury contingency that makes me uncomfortable to trade underperforming veterans (e.g. Robidas/Morrow) at this early point in the season. That and the minimized trade value coming back.

ginblossoms is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2011, 09:18 PM
  #34
piqued
Global Moderator
go
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 30,719
vCash: 27750
I was thinking about this last night... it's probably just one of my crazy thoughts... but...

Is Larsen our best D-man right now?

Souray's play fell off the face of the Earth. He can't get a shot through to save his life and is getting caught up ice and walked around easily. Goligoski is rusty and still seems more tentative than he did last year. Robidas is on a major decline. Daley is maddeningly mediocre as usual. Grossman is steady but not a game-changer. Fistric isn't playing. Obviously not Pardy. Um... I take Larsen over all those guys.

piqued is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2011, 09:25 PM
  #35
BigG44
Registered User
 
BigG44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,770
vCash: 475
Quote:
Originally Posted by ginblossoms View Post
After this most recent stint with the big club, Larsen indeed seems ready to stick in the NHL. That said, I still think that due to veteran contracts and the inability to send anyone else down, the most practical thing to do is send Larsen down to Austin assuming a fully healthy roster. He can develop further and provide a good contingency plan in the event of more injuries.
I agree that Larsen going down is the most likely scenario, but the bolded point isn't accurate.

With a new owner, Dallas, like many other teams in the NHL, could bury a guy like Pardy in the minors.

Plus, the cost of doing so is actually not that bad. About 65% of the season remains. That means Larsen is owed a little under $450,000 in the NHL should he stay. In the AHL, he'd only cost about $39,000. However, staying the remainder of the year would likely allow him to earn $165,000 of games played bonuses. I've never been able to find out the terms of those bonues, but I doubt they are impossible (82 games) to earn for him. Part of them might be rather high, but I imagine the majority of the bonus is still attainable. Then consider Pardy costs the exact same in the NHL or AHL. At the very worst, they would only be asking the new owner to pay the difference of $576,000 to bury Pardy and keep Larsen as a full time NHLer.

Best case scenario .... you might actually get someone to take Pardy on re-entry (still doubtful). Instead of paying Pardy $1.3 million, they'd only owe him $650,000. Dallas would then have Larsen full time without raising the payroll at all.

BigG44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2011, 09:40 PM
  #36
LatvianTwist
Global Moderator
 
LatvianTwist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Houston
Country: Tibet
Posts: 18,027
vCash: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigG44 View Post
I agree that Larsen going down is the most likely scenario, but the bolded point isn't accurate.

With a new owner, Dallas, like many other teams in the NHL, could bury a guy like Pardy in the minors.

Plus, the cost of doing so is actually not that bad. About 65% of the season remains. That means Larsen is owed a little under $450,000 in the NHL should he stay. In the AHL, he'd only cost about $39,000. However, staying the remainder of the year would likely allow him to earn $165,000 of games played bonuses. I've never been able to find out the terms of those bonues, but I doubt they are impossible (82 games) to earn for him. Part of them might be rather high, but I imagine the majority of the bonus is still attainable. Then consider Pardy costs the exact same in the NHL or AHL. At the very worst, they would only be asking the new owner to pay the difference of $576,000 to bury Pardy and keep Larsen as a full time NHLer.

Best case scenario .... you might actually get someone to take Pardy on re-entry (still doubtful). Instead of paying Pardy $1.3 million, they'd only owe him $650,000. Dallas would then have Larsen full time without raising the payroll at all.
Did you factor in cap space, though? Obviously, we could take someone back in a trade, but burying someone like Pardy or Robidas in the minors just shoots us in our own foot.

Pardy, we should be able to afford to just drop him, but Robidas would have to leave through a trade (where we get at least a small contract back). And all of this is running with three goalies currently.

And cap geek might be wrong, but why does Wathier still count against the cap? I thought we sent him down already. If not, we're in an even worse situation once everything gets settled, unless they just bury him in between the two teams with no ice time (which IMO is a horrible idea).

LatvianTwist is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2011, 11:15 PM
  #37
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,499
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued View Post
I was thinking about this last night... it's probably just one of my crazy thoughts... but...

Is Larsen our best D-man right now?

Souray's play fell off the face of the Earth. He can't get a shot through to save his life and is getting caught up ice and walked around easily. Goligoski is rusty and still seems more tentative than he did last year. Robidas is on a major decline. Daley is maddeningly mediocre as usual. Grossman is steady but not a game-changer. Fistric isn't playing. Obviously not Pardy. Um... I take Larsen over all those guys.
Yeah until Goligoski gets going I think he is. Larsens got the hockey smarts to anticipate plays that others end up having to rely on physicality to prevent. I've been pretty disappointed in Grossman this year, Souray I wasn't high on from the start but he did just well enough to get my hopes up before playing like crap and Robidas (who i already thought wasnt very good) has seen his play plummet this season. And to think there were people (maybe not here) advocating moving Larsen during the offseason because he was expendable.

txomisc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2011, 11:22 PM
  #38
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,499
vCash: 500
As much as I want Robidas moved I think the best player to trade at this point is Grossman. I don't think he is worth the salary he will likely command and I just don't see him on the roster next season. I suspect if we aren't firmly in the hunt around the deadline Grossman could be moved for a pretty solid price as he is the type of player most people expect to do very well in the playoffs.

txomisc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2011, 01:16 AM
  #39
WhoahNow
Registered User
 
WhoahNow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 507
vCash: 500
At this point I really want to see Larsen stick for the rest of the year. Let him get his legs in this league, but that being said I think a trade would have to be made. Maybe move a D man for a top 6 RW?

WhoahNow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2011, 01:21 PM
  #40
Hull Fan
Czech Stop
 
Hull Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Arlington, TX
Country: Albania
Posts: 5,277
vCash: 500
I hope Joe bites the bullet and moves Grossman. He isn't going to be worth what he'll want to be paid and he's solid but hardly anything special. I imagine if Robidas gets moved it won't be till the off-season unless this team falls off a cliff like it did last season. They won't trade both but I really wish they would.

Hull Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2011, 02:49 PM
  #41
BigG44
Registered User
 
BigG44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,770
vCash: 475
Quote:
Originally Posted by LatvianTwist View Post
Did you factor in cap space, though? Obviously, we could take someone back in a trade, but burying someone like Pardy or Robidas in the minors just shoots us in our own foot.

Pardy, we should be able to afford to just drop him, but Robidas would have to leave through a trade (where we get at least a small contract back). And all of this is running with three goalies currently.

And cap geek might be wrong, but why does Wathier still count against the cap? I thought we sent him down already. If not, we're in an even worse situation once everything gets settled, unless they just bury him in between the two teams with no ice time (which IMO is a horrible idea).
I'm not trying to come off as rude, but I don't follow most of what you are saying.

Dallas is nearly as far from the cap as you can possibly get, and we already know that an internal budget doesn't exist. If its for the good of the team they said they'd spend, they just aren't going to go crazy and rush to the top. Nothing I laid out even puts a dent in Dallas' cap space. It's actually cheaper than going out on making a trade like you said.

Having someone in the minors doesn't shoot you in the foot, but trading them might. You still are 8 D deep and protected from injuries.

BigG44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2011, 03:47 PM
  #42
LatvianTwist
Global Moderator
 
LatvianTwist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Houston
Country: Tibet
Posts: 18,027
vCash: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigG44 View Post
I'm not trying to come off as rude, but I don't follow most of what you are saying.

Dallas is nearly as far from the cap as you can possibly get, and we already know that an internal budget doesn't exist. If its for the good of the team they said they'd spend, they just aren't going to go crazy and rush to the top. Nothing I laid out even puts a dent in Dallas' cap space. It's actually cheaper than going out on making a trade like you said.

Having someone in the minors doesn't shoot you in the foot, but trading them might. You still are 8 D deep and protected from injuries.
I was referring to the cap floor. That was my fault, I never clarified that.

LatvianTwist is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2011, 04:04 PM
  #43
glovesave_35
Name
 
glovesave_35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Korea
Country: United States
Posts: 14,872
vCash: 250
I agree that Larsen is the best defenseman right now. I'm not sure how that factors into the roster decisions to be made. If we had a stable of young defensemen in the AHL I would say they should move a body out, keep Larsen up, and if more injuries come bring up your other guys; unfortunately we don't really have that luxury.

The maddening thing about this situation is that the team is clearly better off with Larsen in the lineup. It's a win-win as far as trying to win now with the best lineup on the ice as well as for Larsen's development. It looks to me like he's reached that part of his learning curve where his real strides will be made at the NHL level. I say that Larsen being good in this case is maddening because in all likelihood he will be sent down once Fistric comes back because it's the easiest of the options. So they are in the odd situation of not making (IMO) the best win-now choice by sending down the younger player for what are ostensibly bureaucratic reasons.

Does Lukowich have to pass through waivers if recalled? I think so but I'm not sure.

glovesave_35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2011, 04:41 PM
  #44
Phil Connors*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 2,627
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhoahNow View Post
At this point I really want to see Larsen stick for the rest of the year. Let him get his legs in this league, but that being said I think a trade would have to be made. Maybe move a D man for a top 6 RW?
I'm biased being a big fan of his, and I think most won't care for the idea for obvious reasons. But I would love to trade for Hemsky, either Grossman or Robidas is what I'd be willing to part with.

Phil Connors* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2011, 04:51 PM
  #45
MetalGodAOD
Moderator
Star Rangers
 
MetalGodAOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 11,780
vCash: 746
I'm not a fan of Hemsky but I'd probably do both those trades. We could definitely use a playmaking top 6 forward.

MetalGodAOD is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2011, 05:16 PM
  #46
BigG44
Registered User
 
BigG44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,770
vCash: 475
Quote:
Originally Posted by LatvianTwist View Post
I was referring to the cap floor. That was my fault, I never clarified that.
Ohhh ... no worries. That is a legitimate concern, but Sean Avery was called up by NY several weeks ago. Dallas is beyond comfortable with their distance to the floor. They're probably close to $2 million over like they were with Avery in the mix to begin with.

BigG44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2011, 05:33 PM
  #47
BigG44
Registered User
 
BigG44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,770
vCash: 475
Some people in the Eklund thread made good points about why Grossman being an option for Philadelphia could be a legitimate rumor.

1) Ek actually has ties in Phili and has been a good source for them before.

2) Most people have an issue with Ek because many of his rumors seem to be geared toward driving traffic with big names. That's not what a Grossman rumor will do.

I don't know that there is enough value for Phili to bite, but would you do Grossman + Vincour for Simmonds?

I'd love to do it without Vincour, but I don't know what would work. Maybe they'd take a risk with Glennie? IDK. Simmonds screams GM Joe/Gulutzen player.

BigG44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2011, 06:22 PM
  #48
MetalGodAOD
Moderator
Star Rangers
 
MetalGodAOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 11,780
vCash: 746
I don't see Simmonds as a top 6 kind of guy. Would rather keep Vincour.

MetalGodAOD is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2011, 06:34 PM
  #49
BigG44
Registered User
 
BigG44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,770
vCash: 475
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnholyPrince View Post
I don't see Simmonds as a top 6 kind of guy. Would rather keep Vincour.
I don't know or honestly feel that Vincour will either. I think he'll be a solid scoring checker probably like Simmonds.

That said, the more I think about it, I'd really hate to trade Vincour for Simmonds.

I was trying to think of a GM Joe type player on Phili's team that would make sense for Grossman. I don't think Gross is enough to land Simmonds, but I don't know that adding Vincour to get it done makes sense.

It's probably pretty redundant. If you get him without Vincour though, I think Simmonds would be an excellent addition to the team.

Grossman's next contract could push $3 million or more. That's pretty common for solid, defensive D. I just think Fistric would be a better option because of a smaller cap hit since he won't be an UFA and won't likely command a significant raise as an RFA (at least not as high as Grossman's.

I know money isn't an issue, but there also really isn't a reason to spend big on another 2nd pairing guy at this time. I won't be angry or upset if they did re-sign him though. I would just like to see what you get for Gross since Fistric is fitting in so nicely right now.

BigG44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2011, 06:38 PM
  #50
Frozen Failure
Best Threadkiller
 
Frozen Failure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,421
vCash: 2111
Send a message via AIM to Frozen Failure Send a message via Yahoo to Frozen Failure
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigG44 View Post
I don't know or honestly feel that Vincour will either. I think he'll be a solid scoring checker probably like Simmonds.

That said, the more I think about it, I'd really hate to trade Vincour for Simmonds.

I was trying to think of a GM Joe type player on Phili's team that would make sense for Grossman. I don't think Gross is enough to land Simmonds, but I don't know that adding Vincour to get it done makes sense.

It's probably pretty redundant. If you get him without Vincour though, I think Simmonds would be an excellent addition to the team.

Grossman's next contract could push $3 million or more. That's pretty common for solid, defensive D. I just think Fistric would be a better option because of a smaller cap hit since he won't be an UFA and won't likely command a significant raise as an RFA (at least not as high as Grossman's.

I know money isn't an issue, but there also really isn't a reason to spend big on another 2nd pairing guy at this time. I won't be angry or upset if they did re-sign him though. I would just like to see what you get for Gross since Fistric is fitting in so nicely right now.
I would still rather trade Robidas.

Frozen Failure 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 02:13 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.