In addition, aside from his point totals Foligno plays and brings a valuable skill set for a 24 kid (again that's TWENTY FOUR) he's a good a guy we've had along the boards since pete shaefer and he actually does something with the puck when he has it there, he has the kind of overall game that will translate well in the playoffs and has a certain game breaking talent to him. He won't do it every night but I feel pretty good anytime foligno's on the ice that he'll take care of the puck and the bigger the game the more you'll get out of him because damnit he's hockey player.
Would I be happy if we had a team deep enough to leave him on the 3rd line? Sure. Who wouldn't be. I'd also be happy to see him get a crack at playing with spezza and michalek too.
So what's your justification for having Smith in that core since you have a big hate on for Foligno?
Not that I don't like Smith, I think he's actually quite good to have in the bottom 6, much like Foligno.
A gritty and smart 3rd line C who can skate 200ft, play PK and doesnt play scared is pretty key to winning a Cup. Depth at Centre and solid goaltending is crucial.
He played C for what, 6 games? He doesnt have the vision or skating ability to play C in the NHL...maybe in the AHL/OHL.
He played C for pretty much his entire hockey career up until he came to Ottawa where they had Spezza, Fisher, Kelly...So he was put on the wing...
When he played C a few months ago he looked fine and produced as good or better than anybody could have imagined yet to you he doesnt have the vision or skating ability??
He played C for pretty much his entire hockey career up until he came to Ottawa where they had Spezza, Fisher, Kelly...So he was put on the wing...
When he played C a few months ago he looked fine and produced as good or better than anybody could have imagined yet to you he doesnt have the vision or skating ability??
What is wrong with his skating?
I guess the Murrays werent too comfortable with Foligno being the 2nd line C as they traded one of their prized prospects and a pick for a another kid to play in the spot he was supposedly excelling at.
I guess the Murrays werent too comfortable with Foligno being the 2nd line C as they traded one of their prized prospects and a pick for a another kid to play in the spot he was supposedly excelling at.
He's far from being a smooth or agile skater.
So you are also saying the Murrays arent comfortable with Zibanejad or Da Costa as 2nd line C as well? Dealing away a soft, overhyped defenseman that looked like he was playing men's league hockey in his highlight video's for a valuable Center doesnt shine a negative light on Foligno. Stats show he played/produced just fine in that role.
I think his skating is just fine, he skates hunched over and with a wide stance but he is quick enough to play against any line and smooth enough to create offense(Butlers goal a few weeks ago)...end to end rush... remember?
That`s the value of Foligno he can play centre or LW, he can play on any line, he can play the game any way required whether it`s a finese game or a tough game. He is much more valuable to this team with his leadership & character than people give him credit for & the organization loves him for the off ice charity work that he does as well.
He comes from good blood lines & he is getting better every yr which is what development is all about, for a 24 yr old player he plays & carries himself like a mature veteran & helps the young guys. I think he is a good communicator as well bewteen the older players & the young. I think he will be a Sen for quite some time.
I guess the Murrays werent too comfortable with Foligno being the 2nd line C as they traded one of their prized prospects and a pick for a another kid to play in the spot he was supposedly excelling at.
He's far from being a smooth or agile skater.
As others mentioned, Foligno is great 3rd liner that when hot can play up on the 2nd line wing. Smith is a good 3rd liner that with good center depth would be pushed down to the 4th line, although he could probably play wing.
I'm not going to argue with you though as it's just a matter of preference, but I'd much rather have the 3rd line winger that can play on the 2nd line, opposed to the 3rd line center that could easily be replaced or pushed down on a team with good center depth.
So you are also saying the Murrays arent comfortable with Zibanejad or Da Costa as 2nd line C as well? Dealing away a soft, overhyped defenseman that looked like he was playing men's league hockey in his highlight video's for a valuable Center doesnt shine a negative light on Foligno. Stats show he played/produced just fine in that role.
I think his skating is just fine, he skates hunched over and with a wide stance but he is quick enough to play against any line and smooth enough to create offense(Butlers goal a few weeks ago)...end to end rush... remember?
Clearly the Murrays went after Turris for a reason - it was a glaring and long standing hole within this organization. If Foligno looked and played well in his stint as 2nd line C, in your opinion, why did the Murrays pull the trigger on the deal? To spite Foligno?
One, two or three highlight reel goals does not make one a smooth or a creator of offense. Doing it CONSISTENTLY would be pretty awesome. I wouldnt even remotely say he has play making vision or abilities. When I think of an effective Foligno, I think of him skating hard to the corner and laying the body - being effective on the forecheck. When I think of an unaffective Foligno, I think of him trying dangle around guys, jump through and over them, and forcing plays.
Clearly the Murrays went after Turris for a reason - it was a glaring and long standing hole within this organization. If Foligno looked and played well in his stint as 2nd line C, in your opinion, why did the Murrays pull the trigger on the deal? To spite Foligno?
One, two or three highlight reel goals does not make one a smooth or a creator of offense. Doing it CONSISTENTLY would be pretty awesome. I wouldnt even remotely say he has play making vision or abilities. When I think of an effective Foligno, I think of him skating hard to the corner and laying the body - being effective on the forecheck. When I think of an unaffective Foligno, I think of him trying dangle around guys, jump through and over them, and forcing plays.
To spite Foligno? ha...No... Turris has very high upside(higher than Foligno) and since being in the NHL Foligno has played LW... The opportunity to upgrade your forward ranks is one you take when they are mainly taken up by unknown(Condra, Butler, Greening, Zibby, Smith) or inconsistant(Michalek) especially when all it takes is a dman who wasnt working(still too yound to tell, maybe didnt want to go to bingo??)
I would say that having a highlight real with wayy more than 3 fancy goals would lead to calling somebody a skilled player...Foligno is at his best when he is playing confident(thats physical, with skill, with grit) not just dumping it it and banging(that job is for the winchesters)
Sure when he is struggling and tries to beat guys one on one it gets annoying, but same goes for Spezzas toe drags, Neil's wraparounds, Butlers wrister from blue line...
A forward who played C in junior doesn't really mean much though. A lot of NHL forwards were C's when they were kids because you generally put your best athletes in youth hockey.
Foligno probably isn't fast enough to be a C in the NHL, but he's still a pretty good winger. He's got great hands and he's fantastic along the boards. He's not going to get 60 points but you can do a lot worse with a 2nd line winger spot.
I see Nick as the current replacement for Mike Fisher in terms of style of play. Good third liner, ok second liner with speed and physicality along the boards but missing some hockey sense and a bit of a puck hog. Quite valuable.
Last edited by dennilfloss: 02-15-2012 at 07:28 PM.
Foligno is cool. And yes he played better at centre. He seems more involved in the game. He's a #6 or 7 forward, despite him being 107th in scoring among forwards.
He should only be moved for an upgrade, not picks, as he is young still.
So why is Foligno, who may not even reach the previously mentioned point totals, such a valued commodity here? As I originally said, I wouldnt bat an eye if Foligno was part of a package to upgrade the forwards.
Because he's a a proven player with a lot of experience on a team that is short of both of those attributes? Because he's a physical, all-round player at a scarce position? Because he's a home grown player who works hard and seems committed to the organization?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohhh Franco
A solidly run organization should be able to draft and develop Foligno's. Easily replaceable!
In 20 drafts, only 13 forwards drafted by the Senators have cracked 40 points. Ottawa's been an extremely solid organization and that level of producing 40+ point forwards should be better than average.
That doesn't look easy to me. It looks easy if you make homer projections about our future prospects by claiming that 6 guys from the '09/'10/'11 drafts are easily going to crack 40+ reguarly because 'Foligno's' grow on trees... but not if you look at real outcomes. The real outcomes say that we should be happy if we develop an average of player who ever cracks 40+ points per draft.
What are the chances that guys like Noeson, Puempel, Prince, Stone, etc ever put up 40+ point seasons? ... 20% each, maybe lower depending on the prospect?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohhh Franco
In my opinion, the core of a Cup contending team is never more than 4-8 players.
Spezza
Alfredsson
Michalek
Turris
Smith
Karlsson
Cowen
This is so arbitrary as to be almost meaningless, both in terms of the size of your defined list and the players you chose to fill it. Not only that; a list like this disregards contributions of a lot important players.
How about this for representative... 6-8-6?
6 = 3 best forwards, 2 best D-men, starting goalie
8 = 6 next best forwards, next 2 best D-men
6 = 4th line, bottom pairing D-men, back-up goalie
Or how about the top half of the roster? (10 players)
5-6 best forwards, 3-4 best D-men and/or #1 goalie
... Which you could further sensibly breakdown in to 4-5 stars and 5-6 solid players.
As opposed to saying that Turris and Smith are a part of a list with Spezza & Karlsson, but Foligno and Greening can't be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohhh Franco
You can see that Turris clearly has legit skill and excellent vision. He was drafted 3rd overall for a reason. You have to mould and teach him how to play the NHL game and hope that his raw skill shines through. A guy like Foligno doesnt reek of anything special.
Lots of guys that were drafted top-3 because of their skill at 18yo never amounted to much and a number had done way more than Turris by 22yo. Foligno wasn't drafted top-3, but accomplished a heck of a lot more than Turris by that point in his career.
Foligno is a good stickhandler, makes some nice plays down low, goes to the net and is one of the still rare players who can add a physical presence to an offensive line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legend Killer
To spite Foligno? ha...No... Turris has very high upside(higher than Foligno) and since being in the NHL Foligno has played LW...
Foligno fits better as a LW, he's also much more valuable as a LW because as I alluded to earlier; LW is a very scarce position. On average, a center will probably outscore a RW by 4-5 points and RW will probably outscore a LW by 4-5 points. So there should be a huge difference in offensive expectations.
The past 3 seasons, the 40th LW in scoring (or 10th best 2nd line LW) put up: 40, 40 & 42 points for an average of 40.67
... Hey, those are starting to look like numbers that Foligno could start outproducing. How come the rest of the league doesn't understand how easy it is to produce those?
The past 3 seasons, the 40th C in scoring (or 10th best 2nd line C) put up: 47, 50 & 49 points for an average of 48.67 points
Because he's a a proven player with a lot of experience on a team that is short of both of those attributes? Because he's a physical, all-round player at a scarce position? Because he's a home grown player who works hard and seems committed to the organization?
In 20 drafts, only 13 forwards drafted by the Senators have cracked 40 points. Ottawa's been an extremely solid organization and that level of producing 40+ point forwards should be better than average.
That doesn't look easy to me. It looks easy if you make homer projections about our future prospects by claiming that 6 guys from the '09/'10/'11 drafts are easily going to crack 40+ reguarly because 'Foligno's' grow on trees... but not if you look at real outcomes. The real outcomes say that we should be happy if we develop an average of player who ever cracks 40+ points per draft.
What are the chances that guys like Noeson, Puempel, Prince, Stone, etc ever put up 40+ point seasons? ... 20% each, maybe lower depending on the prospect?
This is so arbitrary as to be almost meaningless, both in terms of the size of your defined list and the players you chose to fill it. Not only that; a list like this disregards contributions of a lot important players.
How about this for representative... 6-8-6?
6 = 3 best forwards, 2 best D-men, starting goalie
8 = 6 next best forwards, next 2 best D-men
6 = 4th line, bottom pairing D-men, back-up goalie
Or how about the top half of the roster? (10 players)
5-6 best forwards, 3-4 best D-men and/or #1 goalie
... Which you could further sensibly breakdown in to 4-5 stars and 5-6 solid players.
As opposed to saying that Turris and Smith are a part of a list with Spezza & Karlsson, but Foligno and Greening can't be.
Lots of guys that were drafted top-3 because of their skill at 18yo never amounted to much and a number had done way more than Turris by 22yo. Foligno wasn't drafted top-3, but accomplished a heck of a lot more than Turris by that point in his career.
Foligno is a good stickhandler, makes some nice plays down low, goes to the net and is one of the still rare players who can add a physical presence to an offensive line.
Foligno fits better as a LW, he's also much more valuable as a LW because as I alluded to earlier; LW is a very scarce position. On average, a center will probably outscore a RW by 4-5 points and RW will probably outscore a LW by 4-5 points. So there should be a huge difference in offensive expectations.
The past 3 seasons, the 40th LW in scoring (or 10th best 2nd line LW) put up: 40, 40 & 42 points for an average of 40.67
... Hey, those are starting to look like numbers that Foligno could start outproducing. How come the rest of the league doesn't understand how easy it is to produce those?
The past 3 seasons, the 40th C in scoring (or 10th best 2nd line C) put up: 47, 50 & 49 points for an average of 48.67 points
Wow...you did alot of good research.... Thanks for that...
Foligno is now 1 point away from his career high while destroying his previous career high in hits already. Already passed his previous high in assists too. No reason to trade him at all, versatile forward that can play left wing or center, hits, scores and can play on any line.
Foligno-Smith-Condra is a really good line that should play together all the time. I think it's the perfect third line for a young team (or any team really)
how are people attacking Figs skating? hes possibly the best skater on the team. During dev camp, they brought Foligno in to teach Matt Puempel how to skate properly. I was there, and saw it first hand. Next to Karlsson, Foligno is the best skater at bringing the puck into the offensive end. He is a fantastic skater and I'd love to see someone retort that.
You need some elite players to compete for a Championship. But you need the role players. They are part of any great teams core. Boston doesn't win without Kelly and Peverley and Marchand.
The Senators rebuild is nearly complete BECAUSE of the core guys we have at forward making reasonable money. Smith, Foligno, Greening, Condra. Those players make low salaries and contribute anywhere they are in the lineup. Those guys should not be included in trades, especially as throw ins. They are the difference between the Senators being in a playoff spot and a lottery team.
It is laughable to say Foligno is "easily replaceable" he isn't. Neil isn't, Smith isn't. Even Condra and Greening are not easily replaceable. Where else can you get two players that are smart and can play on any line in any forward spot basically for under a million a year? Even with so many prospect forwards ready to compete like Filatov, Da Costa, Zibanejad, Silfverberg, Hoffman, Stone... and Butler... doesn't mean they are pushing Condra or Greening off this team... no way that happens. They might end up on the 4th line... and they will be very effective there if that happens.
Hardly any players are "easily replaceable". It is silly to think you only need to focus on a handful of stars to make a team. Why did Detroit keep so many effective role players for so many seasons? Smith and Foligno are awesome players. Not many can combine their physicality with offence.
You need a full team. Edmonton SUCKS because they have 4 or 5 supremely talented forwards a couple of D-Men and nothing. You need all these guys. The freaking Ducks beat us because they had Moen, Niedermeyer and Pahlsson... that was the difference between them and us.. far more then Pronger or the Getzlaf line. The Sens had such loaded elite heavy teams from 2002-2007 and we were missing the role guys and we never won the Cup.
To me... Smith, Foligno, Greening, Condra... you keep them long term. They need to be on the ice in our top 12 forwards no matter where they slot in. Neil... you keep while he is effective. Spezza, Turris, Michalek are the "STARS" you keep them. Alfredsson stays until he retires which I hope is in 2 or 3 or 4 more seasons if we are lucky. You are filling the other 3 or 4 forward spots with the all the prospects, Butler, Daugavins, Winchester if he gets healthy and resigns.
The "rebuild" is done to 9 forwards deep. That is a "core". You need to be good through four lines and Greening and Condra are very effective players even if they get forced down to the 4th line. Smith and Foligno are at minimum elite 3rd liners. They are "core" players.
If we want the rebuild to go on forever we can trade Foligno or Smith and Greening/Condra... or we can keep the winners and move ahead. With 7 or 8 high quality prospects and Butler fighting to make 3 roster spots next season we likely fill those spots and discover new members of our forward core.
