HFBoards

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

2011-12 Ducks Season Prediction Discussion

View Poll Results: Where are the Ducks going to finish in the standings for 2011-2012?
1st 1 2.04%
2nd 0 0%
3rd 2 4.08%
4th 2 4.08%
5th 8 16.33%
6th 17 34.69%
7th 8 16.33%
8th 7 14.29%
9th 1 2.04%
10th 1 2.04%
11th 1 2.04%
12th 0 0%
13th 1 2.04%
14th 0 0%
15th 0 0%
Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-03-2011, 12:34 PM
  #1
c4rcy
Power lvls over 9000
 
c4rcy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: OC, California
Country: United States
Posts: 2,536
vCash: 500
2011-12 Ducks Season Prediction Discussion

Where do you guys see the Ducks finishing next season given the current roster?

I'm going to go with 6th. If everyone plays to their potential and Fowler/Sbisa/Cogliano/McMillan have breakout years, we could be a darkhorse to steal the division.

If you want, feel free to post your season-end standings for 2011-2012.

c4rcy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 12:44 PM
  #2
Kalvinators
Go Ducks!
 
Kalvinators's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Latvia
Country: Latvia
Posts: 10,203
vCash: 500
woted 9th.

Besed on that west is gotten a bit stronger and Hillsy and Lydman situation could REALLLY hurt us.

+ Teemu. :/

+ Koivu and Blake probably will regress anyway.

Hope i`m wrong and we could get into PO.

Kalvinators is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 01:51 PM
  #3
McDonald19
Hampus
 
McDonald19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 17,703
vCash: 500
6th sounds about right.

I'm hoping for a more consistent season. I don't think that huge push to home ice is going to happen again.

McDonald19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 02:04 PM
  #4
c4rcy
Power lvls over 9000
 
c4rcy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: OC, California
Country: United States
Posts: 2,536
vCash: 500
1. Vancouver
2. San Jose
3. Chicago
4. LA
5. Detroit
6. Anaheim
7. Nashville
8. St. Louis
9. Dallas
10. Columbus
11. Minnesota
12. Colorado
13. Calgary
14. Edmonton
15. Phoenix

I think the fact that Phoenix lost so many good players including Bryz is going to make it really difficult for them to finish as high as they have for the last 2 years. Edmonton might finish marginally better. I think we will see significant improvements from St. Louis,Colorado and Columbus but the latter two aren't close to competing for a playoff spot quite yet.

c4rcy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 02:16 PM
  #5
JabbaJabba
Registered User
 
JabbaJabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Finland
Posts: 4,242
vCash: 50
6th, teams like Canucks, Sharks, Kings, Red Wings and probably Blackhawks are ahead of us. Blues have gotten better but I'm not completely sold that they are better than Ducks. Columbus is stronger now but not strong enough to pass us. Minnesota and Edmonton are a bit better now. Dallas and Phoenix are weaker. Calgary, Nashville and Colorado are almost same as before.

So my rankings are...

1. Vancouver
2. San Jose
3. Chicago
4. Detroit
5. LA
6. Anaheim
7. St. Louis
8. Minnesota
9. Nashville
10. Columbus
11. Colorado
12. Dallas
13. Edmonton
14. Phoenix
15. Calgary

JabbaJabba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 02:47 PM
  #6
DuckshaveaRPG
Registered User
 
DuckshaveaRPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 829
vCash: 500
WENT 6TH
1. Vancouver
2. San Jose
3. LA
4. Detroit
5. HAWKS
6. Anaheim
7. NASHVILLE they always mange to put up points
the last place i think is any ones who ever gets hot at the right time could get it


Last edited by DuckshaveaRPG: 09-02-2011 at 09:39 AM.
DuckshaveaRPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 02:58 PM
  #7
Gibson Les Palms
pas assez bon
 
Gibson Les Palms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,292
vCash: 50
Anywhere from 5th to 9th, imo.

I will go with 7th. I expect the 2nd line to regress even more, but the west got weaker and the east got stronger, imo, this offseason.

Let's hope some rookies can produce at some point along with better play from the 2 young D and Cogliano's valuable production.

Gibson Les Palms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 03:08 PM
  #8
alx83*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,469
vCash: 500
I think our third line is going to be an integral part of the team this season.

alx83* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 04:20 PM
  #9
Paul4587
Registered User
 
Paul4587's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,343
vCash: 500
5th or 6th.

LA, SJ, Van and Det are clearly ahead. Chicago is probably slightly ahead of us. At least on paper. This is assuming Selanne comes back and Hiller is fine.

Paul4587 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 04:34 PM
  #10
snarktacular
Ducks tank is on!
 
snarktacular's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 18,179
vCash: 90
I say 8th. Just like last season it's a big jumble in the middle. A lot of mediocrity. Last year we pushed to the top of the mediocrity. To counterbalance that I predict we'll finish on the low end of the jumble. The jumble is shorter a few teams this year.

But really the jumble means I could see anywhere from 5th to 9th.



Just for fun here's last year's thread. http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=812459

And just to toot my own horn, here's a couple things I said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by snarktacular View Post
Looking at our defense, I want to say 13. But really when you look at the teams, there is a pretty large group of mediocrity.

I'm going to go with 10.

And just to get a rise out of people... I believe that goaltending is going to be one of our downfalls. I'm thinking Hiller will have a down year, as an adjustment period in handling a starter's workload and the combined increase in workload from our wretched D. Also a kind of post-Olympic slump. I'm extremely concerned about McBackup's ability to play any kind of stretch, so then we could be in big trouble.
10th was a bit off, but 10th place was only 5 points fewer than what we got. Hiller didn't have a down season, but he did have problems with the increased workload (maybe... depends on if you think the vertigo was related). And yes McBackup hurt us.

I'll paraphrase the 2nd post, into the 2 relevant points: I said a) our defense would hurt us because Lydman, Sutton and Lubo might have injuries and we didn't have the depth to cover and b) concerns about checking forwards. A) ended up not being as much of a concern since Lubo and Lydman were healthier than normal (although we did have still have defensive depth issues which lead to acquiring Beauch). B) was right on.

So I feel pretty good about my predictions last year.

snarktacular is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 05:02 PM
  #11
alx83*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,469
vCash: 500
There was nothing mediocre about what our team did last year.

alx83* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 05:15 PM
  #12
Paul4587
Registered User
 
Paul4587's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McMilli View Post
There was nothing mediocre about what our team did last year.
Aside from Hiller carrying our crappy D until he got hurt and Perry & Selanne's insane run at the end where they carried us on their backs to squeak us into fourth place I thought we were very mediocre. We were certainly worse than mediocre in the playoffs where we let Jordin ****ing Tootoo light us up on a regular basis and allowed the same back door passing play to work multiple times.

Paul4587 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 05:35 PM
  #13
Selanne138
Registered User
 
Selanne138's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McMilli View Post
There was nothing mediocre about what our team did last year.
well the top half of our team was well above medicore, and the bottom half was well below mediocre so it evens out i suppose.

Also voted 7th. Nashville always finishes higher than anyone expects I think they get 5/6 with Chicago, and we get 7th. We can finish anywhere from 5-9 IMO with Colorado, St. Louis and Columbus challenging for a playoff spot.

Selanne138 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 06:01 PM
  #14
Vipers31
Advanced Stagnostic
 
Vipers31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bergisch Gladbach
Country: Germany
Posts: 13,496
vCash: 500
I can't really make a bold statement, too much seems to be possible. I don't see us beating the Sharks in the regular season as of now - given that they have always been strong in those and look very good once again - but I don't see too many teams one would have to slot in above us. The Kings got Richards, so they will be tougher to play against once Doughty is settled. Columbus could be rising. St. Louis as well. Minnesota as well, but not to the degree where I have them finishing that far up, yet. I don't think the Avs are going to be as bad as many seem to expect, either, but should finish below us.

If you look at the Ducks themselves, we have our top line of young star players that only improved. Second line should be somewhere around where it was last year, which isn't great. Third line should be better, with whoever makes it to the missing spot there. On defense, we'll have a whole year of Beauchemin, hopefully finding some chemistry with Fowler, who should be even better (more rounded) already, if the playoffs are any indication. Sbisa will be interesting to see. Possibly missing Lydman early on is a little troublesome, but we did so last season as well.

A lot obviously rests on Hiller. As of now, there seem to be more reasons to be optimistic. In Ellis, we have a better back-up than McElhinney, with potential further insurance in JDD and Tarkki.

All that's just thoughts of paper, in utter disregard of the many intangible aspects of the game, so we'll see. Paper would have me guess 5-7 as the most realistic finish. But anything between 4 and 10 would not be entirely surprising.

Vipers31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 06:23 PM
  #15
Vipers31
Advanced Stagnostic
 
Vipers31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bergisch Gladbach
Country: Germany
Posts: 13,496
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by snarktacular View Post
And just to toot my own horn, here's a couple things I said:
Quote:
Looking at our defense, I want to say 13. But really when you look at the teams, there is a pretty large group of mediocrity.

I'm going to go with 10.

And just to get a rise out of people... I believe that goaltending is going to be one of our downfalls. I'm thinking Hiller will have a down year, as an adjustment period in handling a starter's workload and the combined increase in workload from our wretched D. Also a kind of post-Olympic slump. I'm extremely concerned about McBackup's ability to play any kind of stretch, so then we could be in big trouble.
10th was a bit off, but 10th place was only 5 points fewer than what we got. Hiller didn't have a down season, but he did have problems with the increased workload (maybe... depends on if you think the vertigo was related). And yes McBackup hurt us.

I'll paraphrase the 2nd post, into the 2 relevant points: I said a) our defense would hurt us because Lydman, Sutton and Lubo might have injuries and we didn't have the depth to cover and b) concerns about checking forwards. A) ended up not being as much of a concern since Lubo and Lydman were healthier than normal (although we did have still have defensive depth issues which lead to acquiring Beauch). B) was right on.

So I feel pretty good about my predictions last year.
So, you would not quite consider yourself a perfectionist, would you?

Five points are a fun stat there, but whenever you pick teams to finish somewhere in the middle of a conference, it's pretty likely to get close, especially in the last years, more and more 3 point games, many overtimes/shootouts, etc., so one can't really give much weight to that, even though last year's race was even closer than usual. The fact remains that you picked 9 teams to finish ahead of the Ducks when only 3 did and we ended up with home-ice advantage. That's nothing I would feel overly good about.

You were completely off about Hiller having a down-year, as you admit. Pointing at McElhinney hurting us - which yes, he did - seems to be questionable to me, too. The idea always has been to not upgrade our backup goaltending after McElhinney had looked solid before, with money we likely did not even have, until Hiller goes down and McE shows he can't do it, given the idea that one would still be able to get help there. You were pointing to a worst-case scenario with Hiller going down and McElhinney starting to struggle, and even with that worst-case scenario, we finished 4th, as we were able to do precisely what I - and others, I assume - had said all along in the backup-discussions: get help when it's needed as it will be available, as we did in Ellis and Emery, and that help was enough to keep us up in the standings. You were entirely right about our checking forwards, but in all honesty, that wasn't quite a bold statement to begin with.

Sorry to be a little harsher than I usually like to be, but I respect it more (Churchill'esque, so to say...) to see someone analyze straight-up why his initial projection ended up off to some degree. Ending up quite a bit off, objectively, and then trying to illustrate why one really wasn't actually as far off, subjectively, just seems significantly less relatable, to me.

Vipers31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 06:40 PM
  #16
alx83*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul4587 View Post
Aside from Hiller carrying our crappy D until he got hurt and Perry & Selanne's insane run at the end where they carried us on their backs to squeak us into fourth place I thought we were very mediocre. We were certainly worse than mediocre in the playoffs where we let Jordin ****ing Tootoo light us up on a regular basis and allowed the same back door passing play to work multiple times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selanne138 View Post
well the top half of our team was well above medicore, and the bottom half was well below mediocre so it evens out i suppose.

Also voted 7th. Nashville always finishes higher than anyone expects I think they get 5/6 with Chicago, and we get 7th. We can finish anywhere from 5-9 IMO with Colorado, St. Louis and Columbus challenging for a playoff spot.
Maybe I didn't choose the right words. For the record, I wasn't stating that our players weren't mediocre ( AHL third line), just saying that what are team accomplished to get into 4th place was not a fluke.

I'm fine with people having different opinions, it just bugs me when people try to understate performances. Just imagine if we had acquired a solid third line center, winger, and defenseman to play with Fowler (even if just a solid depth defenseman like Sopel). We could've made a big run into the finals. As it is, it was already amazing what the team had done up to that point -- taking the roster into consideration.

alx83* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 11:00 PM
  #17
mightyquack
Moderator
You're the man Teemu
 
mightyquack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Perth, WA
Country: Germany
Posts: 19,994
vCash: 500
6th for me, for the teams that got stronger, a few got weaker. I don't even think teams like Columbus will make it anyway, they have crappy goaltending and an average defence at best.

mightyquack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2011, 08:10 PM
  #18
snarktacular
Ducks tank is on!
 
snarktacular's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 18,179
vCash: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vipers31 View Post
So, you would not quite consider yourself a perfectionist, would you?

Five points are a fun stat there, but whenever you pick teams to finish somewhere in the middle of a conference, it's pretty likely to get close, especially in the last years, more and more 3 point games, many overtimes/shootouts, etc., so one can't really give much weight to that, even though last year's race was even closer than usual. The fact remains that you picked 9 teams to finish ahead of the Ducks when only 3 did and we ended up with home-ice advantage. That's nothing I would feel overly good about.

You were completely off about Hiller having a down-year, as you admit. Pointing at McElhinney hurting us - which yes, he did - seems to be questionable to me, too. The idea always has been to not upgrade our backup goaltending after McElhinney had looked solid before, with money we likely did not even have, until Hiller goes down and McE shows he can't do it, given the idea that one would still be able to get help there. You were pointing to a worst-case scenario with Hiller going down and McElhinney starting to struggle, and even with that worst-case scenario, we finished 4th, as we were able to do precisely what I - and others, I assume - had said all along in the backup-discussions: get help when it's needed as it will be available, as we did in Ellis and Emery, and that help was enough to keep us up in the standings. You were entirely right about our checking forwards, but in all honesty, that wasn't quite a bold statement to begin with.

Sorry to be a little harsher than I usually like to be, but I respect it more (Churchill'esque, so to say...) to see someone analyze straight-up why his initial projection ended up off to some degree. Ending up quite a bit off, objectively, and then trying to illustrate why one really wasn't actually as far off, subjectively, just seems significantly less relatable, to me.
Well I didn't get it all right, but I really do think that was a pretty good prediction. I would put my preseason predictions against any other detailed pre-season prediction. I do have to admit, though, that not all of my points were fully fleshed out in these 2 posts.

Let's count the points made:
1) 10th place. Wrong
2) In a jumble of teams ("large group of mediocrity.") It is implied but not stated that we are IN that jumble since otherwise the fact that there is a jumble wouldn't affect our placement (where I said 10 and not 13). Right
3) Goaltending is going to be a downfall. Right.
4) Hiller will have an adjustment period to playing starter's minutes (for 2nd season implied). Wrong.
5) Hiller will have problems with the increased workload because of defensive problems. Right. We were 4th worst in SA/G. Hiller broke down and even started fewer games than the previous year.
6) Post Olympic slump. Wrong. (It should be noted that 4/5/6 weren't supposed to all happen, they were more different reasons why goaltending could be a problem. But I'll grade them as different points, it only makes me look worse).
7) Didn't believe McBackup was good at all. Right. I took a lot of heat on this one, but I was pretty sure it would happen. I wanted him moved and a veteran insurance goalie. And we did have to get one (Ellis).
8) Defensive depth would hurt us. Right. We had to get Beauchemin to fill it.
9) We lost a lot of minutes from Niedermayer, Whitney, and Wiz. Those minutes would have to be picked up by the bottom 3 since Sutton/Lydman/Vis, for whatever reason, don't consistently play that much. Nieds/Whitney/Wiz played 4707 minutes in the 3 prior seasons (essentially estimating what they provide us). Sutton/Lydman/Vis played 4272 minutes. So this was accurate. However our real top 3 (Lydman/Vis/Fowler) played 5379 minutes. This is partially right. I'll count it as a right here, to counter for the partially wrong 10.
10) Lydman, Vis, Sutton are injury risks (which will be bring out the defensive depth issues). Lydman and Vis had career healthy years. Sutton was injured, and it might well be the injury that made him play as bad as he did. Partially right, but I'll count this as wrong to go with #9.
11) Didn't improve checking forward ability, which will hurt us. Right.
12) Faceoffs weren't improved and will hurt us. Right.


So out of 12 points made (and I feel a decent amount of them were bold), I was right on 8 of them. 75%. And while I was very wrong on the place, the underlying issues that I pointed out for why I felt we might do poorly mostly came true. I really do think this was a decent preseason prediction. I'd say it was my best one, and I don't expect to even meet it this season.

Besides this I remember making bold statements about Perry outscoring Getzlaf, Lilja and Sutton being bad, and Lydman being a great signing and good value. Although I think I also made a bold statement about Ryan having a down year statistically but being more important for the team because I thought he would be on the 2nd line which was wrong.


And to directly address one of your points about McBackup, we ended up both being right. I felt the need to rely on the backup was more likely to arrive than normal. We all have to live with risk. But I felt that this was a) an appreciable risk that Hiller would get hurt b) the backups were risky and c) it is really cheap (there's always cheap veteran UFA goalies) to address. And while you call this a "worst case scenario," considering that it happened like how I wondered about it wasn't all that unlikely. So I was right in that it would have to be addressed. But you were right in that it could be addressed midseason, and that in the end it didn't really hurt us since the goaltending was about as solidified as it could be by the time the playoffs came around.

snarktacular is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 10:42 PM
  #19
KelVarnsen
Line combos anyone?
 
KelVarnsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Mission Viejo
Country: United States
Posts: 4,127
vCash: 500
Here is Yahoo Sports Ducks Season Preview.

Kind of a funny read.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puc...rn=nhl-wp11636

KelVarnsen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-02-2011, 12:03 AM
  #20
Hampe
The Hampster
 
Hampe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Charleston, S.C.
Country: United States
Posts: 6,473
vCash: 500
My guess is 8th, or anywhere in the 6th-9th range.

Hampe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-02-2011, 08:31 AM
  #21
ShadowDuck
Captain Anaheim
 
ShadowDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Boston, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,445
vCash: 500
This is how I see the next 365 days going.

Ryan / Getzlaf / Perry
Blake / Koivu / Selanne
DSP / Cogliano / McMillan
Beleskey / Bonino / Parros

Lubo / Lydman
Beachemin / Fowler
Foster / Sbisa

Hiller / Ellis

-This squad has the first good start to the season since the Cup winning season.
-Some of the young guys struggle, team goes on a couple of losing streaks.
-3rd line clicks, takes minutes off of RPG's TOI
-Bobby Ryan takes off ala Perry Style in the middle of the season
-Ryan, Perry, Getzlaf are voted all-stars
-Team starts slow after all star break but has the typical Ducks season finish

-Ducks grab the 6th seed, upset the 3rd seed in the playoffs, but lose in the 2nd round
-Teemu and Blake retire.
-Syracuse Crunch win the Calder Cup.
-Off-season is a repeat of last years, with no significant FA signings (Maybe one big one but kind of hard to speculate at this point)
-Beauchemin re-signed to a 2 yr / 3 million contract

Next year's roster barring any FA singings.

Etem/Ryan / Getzlaf / Perry
Ryan/Etem / Holland / Palmieri
DSP / Cogliano / McMillan
Beleskey / Bonino / Parros

Fowler / Sbisa
Lubo / Lydman
Beauchemin / Schultz

ShadowDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-02-2011, 07:51 PM
  #22
Paul4587
Registered User
 
Paul4587's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,343
vCash: 500
I doubt that Sbisa is a first pairing defenseman by next year. In fact I doubt he ever is, he has a lot of talent but really lacks the hockey sense and decision making ability to be a top pairing guy.

I also doubt that Murray doesn't sign at least one veteran to help out on the second line after Koivu/Selanne/Blake are gone. I think it's somewhat realistic to think that two of Etem/Holland/Palmieri could be top 6 forwards by the beginning of the 2012 season, but the chances all three are in our top 6 are pretty low. Not everyone in our system is going to reach their potential.

Paul4587 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-03-2011, 01:51 AM
  #23
Takao
kesbae
 
Takao's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Southern California
Country: United States
Posts: 10,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul4587 View Post
I doubt that Sbisa is a first pairing defenseman by next year. In fact I doubt he ever is, he has a lot of talent but really lacks the hockey sense and decision making ability to be a top pairing guy.

I also doubt that Murray doesn't sign at least one veteran to help out on the second line after Koivu/Selanne/Blake are gone. I think it's somewhat realistic to think that two of Etem/Holland/Palmieri could be top 6 forwards by the beginning of the 2012 season, but the chances all three are in our top 6 are pretty low. Not everyone in our system is going to reach their potential.
Holland and Palmieri would be ideal as our two to bring in for the second line depending how they do in the AHL this upcoming season. All 3 is a stretch but if it's possible maybe it will be:

Etem-Getzlaf-Perry
Ryan-Holland-Palmieri

Again not saying that's what I want to see or hope to happen after the Masterton line is gone but just throwing ideas around if those 3 were to be with the team.

Anywho I see us being 6th/7th.

Takao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-03-2011, 09:27 AM
  #24
snarktacular
Ducks tank is on!
 
snarktacular's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 18,179
vCash: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul4587 View Post
I doubt that Sbisa is a first pairing defenseman by next year. In fact I doubt he ever is, he has a lot of talent but really lacks the hockey sense and decision making ability to be a top pairing guy.
He hasn't shown it in Anaheim, but I believe he showed good hockey sense relative to his peers in juniors. And he showed pretty good hockey sense for an 18 year old his first year in Philly. So there's still hope.

snarktacular is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-03-2011, 06:53 PM
  #25
Paul4587
Registered User
 
Paul4587's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by snarktacular View Post
He hasn't shown it in Anaheim, but I believe he showed good hockey sense relative to his peers in juniors. And he showed pretty good hockey sense for an 18 year old his first year in Philly. So there's still hope.
I'm not saying he won't pan out or anything, just that I can't see him being more than a #3-4 guy. Going into last season I thought Sbisa was a more promising prospect than Fowler but after a year of watching both it's obvious that Fowler is going to be a star while Sbisa's potential may be a bit more limited.

Paul4587 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 01:03 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.