If Fistric could have been had for a 3rd rounder, why didn't we trade for him?!
I don't know much about Fistric but I would guess that a player made expendable on a team that has signed Sheldon Souray and Aaron Rome is probably not going to be a key part of a contending team.
If Fistric could have been had for a 3rd rounder, why didn't we trade for him?!
Although not according to the nimrods at ESPN, a Canuck third round pick should be a lot later than an Edmonton one. Plus as I sort of joked in another thread, I don't think the owner of the Stars wants to deal with the Canucks. Our price would have been a second round pick.
Fistric
* 1.475m
* cap hit can't be hidden in the minors
* 1 year deal
* UFA in 6 months
* Rome in, Fistric out
Gillis and Gilman can play the cap like a fiddle and dodge the cap hits on Barker and Van by sending them down until needed. Fistric makes too much money, he's like Alberts in the regard and can't be sent down.
Guys on the fringe like Fistric are going to become less enticing with cap hits over 900k counting in the minors, while smart gms learn to shuffle/abuse 900k limit.
A 3rd rounder for Fistric is a nice deal, IMO. Surprised that that's all Dallas could garner in return.
I'm not as bullish on that deal as most. Fistric averages a half shot a game, has 3 goals in 257 games, doesn't move the puck well, struggled to stay in the top 6 of a team with a below average defense and is a UFA in 48 games. He's injury prone to boot.
This is a borderline NHL player, not unlike Andrew Alberts. Was the Alberts deal a nice deal for us? Meh.
I'm not as bullish on that deal as most. Fistric averages a half shot a game, has 3 goals in 257 games, doesn't move the puck well, struggled to stay in the top 6 of a team with a below average defense and is a UFA in 48 games. He's injury prone to boot.
This is a borderline NHL player, not unlike Andrew Alberts. Was the Alberts deal a nice deal for us? Meh.
The Alberts deal was mediocre, as is this deal for EDM. I don't expect much out of this transaction for EDM.
I'm not as bullish on that deal as most. Fistric averages a half shot a game, has 3 goals in 257 games, doesn't move the puck well, struggled to stay in the top 6 of a team with a below average defense and is a UFA in 48 games. He's injury prone to boot.
This is a borderline NHL player, not unlike Andrew Alberts. Was the Alberts deal a nice deal for us? Meh.
Agreed. Fistric looked like he was on track to be a solid player after his 2009-10 season at age 23. But in the two seasons since, he's regressed and been very disappointing for that team. Basically a fringe 6-7 guy in the Alberts mold, although I think he's a bit better than Alberts.
Anyone watch 'that's hockey tonight'? Craig Button had LA winning west and going back to finals, Vancouver finishing 3rd and losing to Nashville in first round. When the fans called him out on twitter on why he predicted a loss to Nashville, he said Vancouver didn't have enough depth on blueline. I guess Nashville can afford to lose Suter though and still have more depth on blueline? OK then Craig...
Anyone watch 'that's hockey tonight'? Craig Button had LA winning west and going back to finals, Vancouver finishing 3rd and losing to Nashville in first round. When the fans called him out on twitter on why he predicted a loss to Nashville, he said Vancouver didn't have enough depth on blueline. I guess Nashville can afford to lose Suter though and still have more depth on blueline? OK then Craig...
Why is every analyst parrotting this nonsense about blueline depth? This is as a bad as Doug Maclean constantly harping the Canucks needed another puck moving defenseman when they had Edler, Ehrhoff, Bieksa and the league's highest scoring defense.
Which dman is higher on the depth chart than they should be? These guys haven't seen much of Jason Garrison? Is it Ballard and Tanev they see as the weak link? I fully expect the bottom pairing to be a strength of the club. Alberts is more than capable as a #7.
Jim Vandermeer isn't good enough to be the #8. Down in the 1st round!
Not only that, Button had Detroit finishing 9th and the Oilers 8th. Button said that picking up Fistric would be enough to put the Oilers in the playoffs.
Why is every analyst parrotting this nonsense about blueline depth? This is as a bad as Doug Maclean constantly harping the Canucks needed another puck moving defenseman when they had Edler, Ehrhoff, Bieksa and the league's highest scoring defense.
Which dman is higher on the depth chart than they should be? These guys haven't seen much of Jason Garrison? Is it Ballard and Tanev they see as the weak link? I fully expect the bottom pairing to be a strength of the club. Alberts is more than capable as a #7.
Jim Vandermeer isn't good enough to be the #8. Down in the 1st round!
He might have had some credibility if he said his concerns with Vancouver were with how quickly Kesler would return to form and how his absence would affect the 2nd line. But instead he singled out one of the team's best strengths as a weakness. Meanwhile he didn't even acknowledge Nashville's offensive problems or lack of depth on D, especially with losing their 5th leading scorer in Suter.
Also, Detroit missing the playoffs? They may have lost Lidstrom, but they still have Zetterberg and Datsyuk. They will muddle through for one of the bottom seeds. They certainly aren't going to miss out to an Edmonton team with a terrible back-end. Schultz could light up the AHL, but can he do it at the NHL level where forwards are a lot bigger, tougher and faster?
Not only that, Button had Detroit finishing 9th and the Oilers 8th. Button said that picking up Fistric would be enough to put the Oilers in the playoffs.
Anyone watch 'that's hockey tonight'? Craig Button had LA winning west and going back to finals, Vancouver finishing 3rd and losing to Nashville in first round. When the fans called him out on twitter on why he predicted a loss to Nashville, he said Vancouver didn't have enough depth on blueline. I guess Nashville can afford to lose Suter though and still have more depth on blueline? OK then Craig...
Nashville also lost Radulov, Kostitsyn, and Tootoo along with Bouillon and Suter...
YEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYY!!! I like Hrudey too even though he hates the Canucks.
I like Kelly Hrudey when I was a kid. But he played for the Kings and they beat us on the way to winning the Cup. Now that I hate the Kings, I have to hate Kelly Hrudey. Plus, he doesn't tell PJ Stock to shut up. If he tells PJ Stock to shut up, I'll forgive him for being a King.
I guess Nashville can afford to lose Suter though and still have more depth on blueline? OK then Craig...
I like Hrudey too even though he hates the Canucks.
