Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
Ottawa has lots of offensive prospects, Phoenix has lots of defensive prospects, good basis for a deal. Prospect swaps of high-end young players who have not been tested in the NHL rarely happen though.
Ottawa has lots of offensive prospects, Phoenix has lots of defensive prospects, good basis for a deal. Prospect swaps of high-end young players who have not been tested in the NHL rarely happen though.
Murray likes making them though.
Rundblad for 1st.
Turris was somewhat tested.
__________________
Senators | 67's | Texans | Blue Jays
Twitter: @TyFi10 | Formerly: Mighty Manked, SeanMonahan | BF3 All-Star
"What if something amazing happens today?" - Jack Jablonski Blog (Click Here): Turris, The Goal. Ottawa, The Win.
Fact: Yandle does not play against the opposition's best players. Not even close.
Hard to argue he's a #1 D.
Sure. I agree. It's just tough to appoint him a top 10-15 D when he's sheltered like that. Even a #1 D.
It's terrible that Coach Tippet prefers to have Oliver Ekman-Larsson playing when Hanzal is out there playing against the opposition's top line. Just because that line plays more of a Continental style of hockey, while Yandle, and his elite speed, make him ideal to play when faster forwards are on the ice in a more transitional type game. But I guess your definition of sheltered minutes has nothing to do with contributing to a win and the success of the team for the season, but how much they are needed to a more define role. But then again, how many centers in the NHL lead their team in minutes while playing against the top lines in the league? That defines Yandle's contribution and not that he is being sheltered.
Fact: Yandle does not play against the opposition's best players. Not even close.
Hard to argue he's a #1 D.
Hard to argue that he isn't, either, since I'm looking at the same Player Usage Charts you are and he did damn well where he was, and so the only conclusion that can be drawn about higher ability is that he might be able to do as well or acceptably with higher responsibility. Only the Coyotes didn't need him to take on that role, so he didn't.
He did not play the role of a #1D in Phoenix. But that does not mean that he is incapable of that role, especially considering the other personnel there.
__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards
Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Hard to argue that he isn't, either, since I'm looking at the same Player Usage Charts you are and he did damn well where he was, and so the only conclusion that can be drawn about higher ability is that he might be able to do as well or acceptably with higher responsibility. Only the Coyotes didn't need him to take on that role, so he didn't.
He did not play the role of a #1D in Phoenix. But that does not mean that he is incapable of that role, especially considering the other personnel there.
Exactly.
On bad teams with ****** defensive depth, guys like Yandle are forced into roles they aren't made for. In Phoenix, we've got better options for that. Michalek, Klesla, Morris, etc. It's why our number six DMan last season had NINETEEN minutes a game. It's called depth and a big reason why we went to the WCFs. A hot goalie and depth on D. It certainly wasn't scoring. haha.
Yandle was the best offensive D on the team and was bottom third in terms of defensive ability. Still, that was enough to make him the most effective ALL AROUND blueliner on the squad, as evidenced by his LEADING THE TEAM IN ICE TIME. Why would an intelligent coach stretch his minutes into the 30s? Why would a team with excellent D depth wear down their top D like that?
There are roles on hockey teams. Yandle has his, Stamkos has his, and then Boyd Gordon and Darren Helm have got theirs.
Those stats fail to take into account the hockey playing aspect of playing hockey, and are only so highly regarded by those desperate to be hockey experts without actually having to watch any hockey. Also, by those looking to manipulate the data to attempt to prove some fallacy in an internet argument. For example, Yandle was SECOND among his D squad the year before last. Wow, what a star, right? Amazing! Now he's dropped and rather than that being an indication of flawed statistical analysis it must mean that Yandle's game fell off the face of the earth and all of a sudden he's no longer a good hockey player but a bad one, right? After all, it's what the worthless little numbers say, right? Utterly ridiculous.
Here's the stats I'm looking at. He led a very good team with extremely good defensive depth in ice time both all around and at even strength. He finished in the top ten in Norris voting twice in a row.
It's terrible that Coach Tippet prefers to have Oliver Ekman-Larsson playing when Hanzal is out there playing against the opposition's top line. Just because that line plays more of a Continental style of hockey, while Yandle, and his elite speed, make him ideal to play when faster forwards are on the ice in a more transitional type game. But I guess your definition of sheltered minutes has nothing to do with contributing to a win and the success of the team for the season, but how much they are needed to a more define role. But then again, how many centers in the NHL lead their team in minutes while playing against the top lines in the league? That defines Yandle's contribution and not that he is being sheltered.
My definition of sheltered is playing against crap players in a strictly offensive role. Especially as a defenseman. Yandle fits the bill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt
Stamkos was 11th on the Lightning among forwards. Not a number one. SHELTERED.
Malkin was 9th in Pittsburgh. Gosh, talk about overrated, right. Sheesh.
That shows that Malkin and Stamkos play a purely offensive role with no shutdown responsibilities. Which makes sense because they are the best offensive players in the league and not so good defensively. I don't see them winning the Selke anytime soon do you?
But they play tough minutes in the sense that they go up against shutdown pairings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi
Hard to argue that he isn't, either, since I'm looking at the same Player Usage Charts you are and he did damn well where he was, and so the only conclusion that can be drawn about higher ability is that he might be able to do as well or acceptably with higher responsibility. Only the Coyotes didn't need him to take on that role, so he didn't.
He did not play the role of a #1D in Phoenix. But that does not mean that he is incapable of that role, especially considering the other personnel there.
Please show this player usage chart. I'm guessing it shows that he plays against bad competition.
Yeah he could use more responsibility, but I suspect he would he would not fare well against the opposition's 1st line every game. Maybe in the same role Letang... 4th on his team in QoC, playing against 2nd lines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt
Exactly.
On bad teams with ****** defensive depth, guys like Yandle are forced into roles they aren't made for. In Phoenix, we've got better options for that. Michalek, Klesla, Morris, etc. It's why our number six DMan last season had NINETEEN minutes a game. It's called depth and a big reason why we went to the WCFs. A hot goalie and depth on D. It certainly wasn't scoring. haha.
Yandle was the best offensive D on the team and was bottom third in terms of defensive ability. Still, that was enough to make him the most effective ALL AROUND blueliner on the squad, as evidenced by his LEADING THE TEAM IN ICE TIME. Why would an intelligent coach stretch his minutes into the 30s? Why would a team with excellent D depth wear down their top D like that?
There are roles on hockey teams. Yandle has his, Stamkos has his, and then Boyd Gordon and Darren Helm have got theirs.
Those stats fail to take into account the hockey playing aspect of playing hockey, and are only so highly regarded by those desperate to be hockey experts without actually having to watch any hockey. Also, by those looking to manipulate the data to attempt to prove some fallacy in an internet argument. For example, Yandle was SECOND among his D squad the year before last. Wow, what a star, right? Amazing! Now he's dropped and rather than that being an indication of flawed statistical analysis it must mean that Yandle's game fell off the face of the earth and all of a sudden he's no longer a good hockey player but a bad one, right? After all, it's what the worthless little numbers say, right? Utterly ridiculous.
Here's the stats I'm looking at. He led a very good team with extremely good defensive depth in ice time both all around and at even strength. He finished in the top ten in Norris voting twice in a row.
My point is Yandle does not play the same ROLE as Weber, Karlsson, Doughty, Pietrangelo, Suter, Chara, .... they play against TOP competition every single game. They are MUCH better defensively. AND they manage to be better offensively than Yandle as well.
Therefore Yandle is not comparable to them as players. You want to label Yandle a #1 D? Fine, he a a top 30 D in the league.
I like it value wise, but I think I'd pass. Would like to see what Zibby's worth. he was our lottery pick, hopefuly he'll turn out the player he's projected to be
My definition of sheltered is playing against crap players in a strictly offensive role. Especially as a defenseman. Yandle fits the bill.
so you are telling me that during this past playoffs the opposition was playing crap players 22:20 minutes a game? And he is strictly an offensive player? Gee I guess other teams just didn't really try then! Or are you going to say that Smith is an elite goalie? And if it's the system, then the defense should get more credit, especially someone as fast as Yandle who can catch up to a potential break out. Yandle doesn't float, is extremely fast, and is constantly in motion. So I don't understand how you or anyone else can say he is just an offensive player. His speed opens up the ice, offensively and defensively, and gives the Coyotes offensive opportunities from jumping into the play. He does rely on his speed more than being physical because he has that quick first step, speed, and can read the play. 2 years ago he had a break out season and started looking like an elite defender. Last season he started the season trying too hard and then later his defensive partner had off ice issues which effected their overall game. Look for Keith Yandle to have a career year this next season (if they don't have a lockout).
My point is Yandle does not play the same ROLE as Weber, Karlsson, Doughty, Pietrangelo, Suter, Chara, .... they play against TOP competition every single game. They are MUCH better defensively. AND they manage to be better offensively than Yandle as well.
Therefore Yandle is not comparable to them as players. You want to label Yandle a #1 D? Fine, he a a top 30 D in the league.
You think Suter, Chara and Doughty are better offensively? I think that's a stretch. Put Yandle on the Bruins or give him Suter's minutes and watch him put up 55-60 on a regular basis...
Ottawa needs it's top forward prospects to attempt to fill all of holes they have up front.
With Karlsson already being a star, Cowen on the cusp of becoming a top-4 D-man, Ceci drafted and Methot hopefully being able to fill a top-4 role (on a team that makes the playoffs)... Ottawa can afford to use much lesser forward prospects to "fix" this problem beyond trading their highest draft pick in over a decade.
I can understand why Phoenix would say no. But I really don't see Gormley having Zibanejad's kind of upside.
Realistically, I think they both project to be solid NHL players.
At this point, with Alfredsson retiring soon, we have more question marks up front and less on the blue line. Should keep as many forward prospects as we can.
I can understand why Phoenix would say no. But I really don't see Gormley having Zibanejad's kind of upside.
Realistically, I think they both project to be solid NHL players.
At this point, with Alfredsson retiring soon, we have more question marks up front and less on the blue line. Should keep as many forward prospects as we can.
Enlighten me. What exactly is Zibanejad's upside? Gormley projects as a #2/#3 dman with offensive upside. One comparison I saw was Teppo Numminen. That is pretty darn good.
Gormley's going to be a heck of a player in the NHL but I wouldn't want Ottawa to give up Zibanejad for him.
__________________
Exhibit A as to how hockey doesn't matter on ESPN:
Last night an ESPN program was discussing how the Detroit Pistons needed a hero citing the heroes on the Detroit Tigers, Detroit Lions and no mention of the Detroit Red Wings. All this despite the Red Wings probably being the most succesful team in Detroit right now.
so you are telling me that during this past playoffs the opposition was playing crap players 22:20 minutes a game? And he is strictly an offensive player? Gee I guess other teams just didn't really try then! Or are you going to say that Smith is an elite goalie? And if it's the system, then the defense should get more credit, especially someone as fast as Yandle who can catch up to a potential break out. Yandle doesn't float, is extremely fast, and is constantly in motion. So I don't understand how you or anyone else can say he is just an offensive player. His speed opens up the ice, offensively and defensively, and gives the Coyotes offensive opportunities from jumping into the play. He does rely on his speed more than being physical because he has that quick first step, speed, and can read the play. 2 years ago he had a break out season and started looking like an elite defender. Last season he started the season trying too hard and then later his defensive partner had off ice issues which effected their overall game. Look for Keith Yandle to have a career year this next season (if they don't have a lockout).
Yes that's what I'm telling.
And I'm not saying he doesn't play his position... I'm saying the Yotes give him zero defensive responsibility (doesn't play against offensive players). They put him out there to score/drive the offense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WJF
You think Suter, Chara and Doughty are better offensively? I think that's a stretch. Put Yandle on the Bruins or give him Suter's minutes and watch him put up 55-60 on a regular basis...
By better offensively, I meant ''put up more points''. Doubt very much Yandle puts up those numbers... ESPECIALLY on the Preds. Don't forget he would be facing top competition as well...
And those teams become instantly worse because Yandle doesn't compare defensively.
I'm not saying he doesn't play his position... I'm saying the Yotes give him zero defensive responsibility (doesn't play against offensive players). They put him out there to score/drive the offense.
