HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Pittsburgh Penguins
Notices

Brooks Orpik

View Poll Results: What would you do with Orpik?
Trade him this season if the right deal is there. 84 63.64%
Move him in the offseason. 17 12.88%
Let him play out his contract here. 22 16.67%
Resign him this summer. 9 6.82%
Voters: 132. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-06-2013, 10:36 PM
  #101
KiuasWarrior
Registered User
 
KiuasWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 698
vCash: 500
Dude has been royally Pissing me off lately... But I think you gotta ride him out the rest of the year into the post season.

KiuasWarrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 11:22 PM
  #102
Tender Rip
No cap on coaching!
 
Tender Rip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 12,289
vCash: 500
I am considering to just step back from these kind of discussions or I am going to get infracted .

But whereas you lot can salivate over futurez, just this before I bench myself:

NO. No statistics showing Bortuzzo to 'do the same' as Orpik matter when he is a rookie having played 11 games, getting 12.28 minutes per night in a third pairing role and with virtually no PK time. Please. I like Bortuzzo and would be completely fine with him on the third pairing, but this is just too much.

NO. There is no way our defensive frailty and playoff worries against tough forechecks is going to be helped by decreasing our physicality & vet presence on D in favor of getting one more forward to the highest scoring team in the league. If we cannot get a forward for support using our Mount Everest pile of talented young D-men, then Shero deserves a kick in the teeth.

Consider this. Remove Orpik from our team in favor of a forward and you end up with Niskanen being paired with Letang or Martin in the top4, and both thoughts are pretty much sickening with the playoffs in mind.
Have we taken nothing of import from last years playoffs or the times where our D has looked its most craptacular this season?

Tender Rip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 12:15 AM
  #103
jmelm
HFBoards Sponsor
 
jmelm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag68Sid87 View Post
Orpik for Smid and Paajarvi is the kind of deal that would literally be the perfect storm for us.
I forgot to address this when I quoted this post earlier. On TSN last night (and I'm sure you saw this), they did mention that Paajarvi is available, but really only if they are getting a "top-6 power forward" to bring toughness into their line-up in return. Now, I would assume that they would expand their idea of trading Paajarvi if there was a YOUNG top-4 Dman on offer (i.e. Despres/Dumouline/etc.), but there's no chance that they trade Paajarvi for Orpik unless Brooks wanted to play and sign an extension there. That type of discussion wouldn't happen till the summer at the earliest, if at all. So, we can get Paajarvi for a DMan, but just not for Brooks right now.

Regarding Smid: he's a nice player for sure, but I don't think he's enough of a difference maker long-term to make me want to move Despres or Bortuzzo to the press-box. Smid is a really nice #4/5/6 Dman, but that's not really a priority for us, and not the player I would spend our prescious assets towards.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
I am considering to just step back from these kind of discussions or I am going to get infracted .

But whereas you lot can salivate over futurez, just this before I bench myself:

NO. No statistics showing Bortuzzo to 'do the same' as Orpik matter when he is a rookie having played 11 games, getting 12.28 minutes per night in a third pairing role and with virtually no PK time. Please. I like Bortuzzo and would be completely fine with him on the third pairing, but this is just too much.

NO. There is no way our defensive frailty and playoff worries against tough forechecks is going to be helped by decreasing our physicality & vet presence on D in favor of getting one more forward to the highest scoring team in the league. If we cannot get a forward for support using our Mount Everest pile of talented young D-men, then Shero deserves a kick in the teeth.

Consider this. Remove Orpik from our team in favor of a forward and you end up with Niskanen being paired with Letang or Martin in the top4, and both thoughts are pretty much sickening with the playoffs in mind.
Have we taken nothing of import from last years playoffs or the times where our D has looked its most craptacular this season?

I agree to a fair extent, which is why I say I don't consider moving Brooks unless it brings in a top-6, goal-scoring winger who can play for us this season. There is no way we trade him for futures. But trading him in a 3-way deal to get Jarome Iginla or Corey Perry? That would ease the nausea in my stomach of having Nisky or Despres playing top-3 minutes in a Cup run.

jmelm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 12:27 AM
  #104
Tender Rip
No cap on coaching!
 
Tender Rip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 12,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmelm View Post
I agree to a fair extent, which is why I say I don't consider moving Brooks unless it brings in a top-6, goal-scoring winger who can play for us this season. There is no way we trade him for futures.
Then you are not agreeing to a fair extent, you are not agreeing at all .

Tender Rip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 12:37 AM
  #105
Crafton
Liver-Eating Johnson
 
Crafton's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,509
vCash: 50
i'm thinking that most who want Orpik traded at the deadline, have in mind (or at least implicitly in the back of their mind) some kind of rental acquisition along the lines of Regehr, Murray, O'Byrne or Kesla (2 years). if not, TR's concerns should be ringing loud and clear.


Last edited by Crafton: 03-07-2013 at 01:31 AM.
Crafton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:24 AM
  #106
jmelm
HFBoards Sponsor
 
jmelm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crafton View Post
i'm thinking that most who want Orpik traded at the deadline, have in mind (or at least implicitly in at the back of their mind) some kind of rental acquisition along the lines of Regehr, Murray, O'Byrne or Kesla (2 years). if not, TR's concerns should be ringing loud and clear.

And I think you're not alone in seeing things that way, and I think Ray Shero is right there with you. There's no question that they signed Eaton, in part, to just provide extra depth. I understod that move at the time in that way. But seeing not only how well he has played, but the fact that they are giving him game action at all, shows that they are looking at him being a contributor. This means where there's smoke there's fire. And I don't know if that fire is a trade for Simon Despres, or a trade for Brooks Orpik. But it seems clear that Shero likes to have the extra depth and be pro-active about having a fall-back option. So it's safe to assume that if he could be looking to add a Dman if another one is going out the door -- in the same way that he INSISTED upon Niskanen being part of the Neal trade because they needed that extra depth if they're sending a better guy going the other way.


Now, all that said: I'm an outside of the box guy, and while the closest direction between two points is a straight line, I don't mind taking a round-about, creative approach to reaching an objective. What I have in mind, specifically, is a 3-way deal. Brooks Orpik will not yield Jarome Iginla in a trade. Heck, I don't think Brooks Orpik would yield JBo straight up in a trade, and these whole points may be moot because CGY will want to get younger and Orpik may not have CGY on his list. But if there's a team that REALLY wants Brooks, we could parlay those asset into part of what could be a package that might yield an Iginla or Perry type player.


So, for example: if we could get a late 1st (probably unlikely, since that may mean trading Brooks to a potential playoff foe, plus it's high price), or a 2nd + 3rd/4th pick, or a 2nd + a good prospect, we could package those assets into a deal with a guy like, say, Maatta or Dumoulin, and/or a Jeffrey + TK, and put together some kind of package that could intrigue Anaheim or Calgary for Perry/Iginla. We don't want to emply the cupboard to get one of those guys, so moving Brooks out could bring in some assets that would help make the price something that's easier to swallow.


In short: I don't move Brooks this season without getting an impact forward in return. But if Brooks won't deliver that player on his own (though ANA may see him as a good fit long-term if they can extend him, whereas I don't think Brooks would want anything to do with CGY), then a 3-way trade may be a real option. Food for thought, eh?

jmelm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 02:53 AM
  #107
Tender Rip
No cap on coaching!
 
Tender Rip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 12,289
vCash: 500
Do me a favor then....

Assume that you get the kind of forward you crave using Brooks as one of the pieces to do so.

Now, what kind of defense do you feel comfortable with for the playoffs in the event that you have that extra forward? Please give me your prospective pairings.

Tender Rip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 04:56 AM
  #108
HotCoffey
Registered User
 
HotCoffey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
Do me a favor then....

Assume that you get the kind of forward you crave using Brooks as one of the pieces to do so.

Now, what kind of defense do you feel comfortable with for the playoffs in the event that you have that extra forward? Please give me your prospective pairings.
Despres, Letang
Niskanen, Martin
Eaton, Engelland, Bortuzzo

What's the harm? Going out in the first round of the playoffs? We've done that 2 times in the past 3 seasons WITH Orpik. And him being one of the biggest playoff minuses in the team the past playoff year. I get player loyalty but this isn't a discussion many other teams would be having. If there's a halfway decent deal for an aging D man when you have serviceable replacements and you can fill a weakness, you do it 100%.

HotCoffey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 06:41 AM
  #109
wgknestrick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,883
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotCoffey View Post
Despres, Letang
Niskanen, Martin
Eaton, Engelland, Bortuzzo

What's the harm? Going out in the first round of the playoffs? We've done that 2 times in the past 3 seasons WITH Orpik. And him being one of the biggest playoff minuses in the team the past playoff year. I get player loyalty but this isn't a discussion many other teams would be having. If there's a halfway decent deal for an aging D man when you have serviceable replacements and you can fill a weakness, you do it 100%.
Exactly. Don't forget the plethora of good D prospects we have just behind those 5-6 guys too. Orpik is probably gone as an UFA anyway. Pens would be foolish to re-sign him with his performance the last 2-3 years and their prospect situation.

wgknestrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 07:07 AM
  #110
Tender Rip
No cap on coaching!
 
Tender Rip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 12,289
vCash: 500
So, you two envision that we go with a top pairing featuring a rookie who has played zero full games with Letang and has 35 games in the NHL, total. You think it is a fine idea to have Martin and Niskanen together for perhaps the softest shut down pairing in NHL history despite them having hardly ever played a game together, and then we go with Eaton who after being discarded by the Islanders after a poor season weren't picked up by anyone, and has now played two OK'ish games for the Pens and pair him with Engelland or Bortuzzo.
That's the backdrop to dealing our most physical D-man, a 20 minute per game top4 defender who wears an 'A'.

I suppose one guys opinion is as good as anyones.... but the thought of that D as our playoff defense makes me physically ill. I think you are nuts.

Furthermore, nobody should give a damn about which prospects we have who are not NHL ready when its time for the PLAYOFFS! It makes no core player replaceable THIS season.

If you want to get value for Orpik while creating space for our budding talent, you deal him after the season, when he still has a year on his contract. I can get on board that thought actually, at least it still leaves a deadline to add experience if it turns out we miss it.

But holy crap!

Tender Rip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 07:21 AM
  #111
ColePens
Global Moderator
Your Savior
 
ColePens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 32,307
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to ColePens
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
I am considering to just step back from these kind of discussions or I am going to get infracted .

But whereas you lot can salivate over futurez, just this before I bench myself:

NO. No statistics showing Bortuzzo to 'do the same' as Orpik matter when he is a rookie having played 11 games, getting 12.28 minutes per night in a third pairing role and with virtually no PK time. Please. I like Bortuzzo and would be completely fine with him on the third pairing, but this is just too much.

NO. There is no way our defensive frailty and playoff worries against tough forechecks is going to be helped by decreasing our physicality & vet presence on D in favor of getting one more forward to the highest scoring team in the league. If we cannot get a forward for support using our Mount Everest pile of talented young D-men, then Shero deserves a kick in the teeth.

Consider this. Remove Orpik from our team in favor of a forward and you end up with Niskanen being paired with Letang or Martin in the top4, and both thoughts are pretty much sickening with the playoffs in mind.
Have we taken nothing of import from last years playoffs or the times where our D has looked its most craptacular this season?
I said it early in the thread and I'll say it again - I just want #44 to hold himself accountable for his sloppy play. We NEED him to play to his level. If he continues at the level he's playing, he's worthless. He is really playing poor hockey.

But the Orpik we have come to love and know - we need that.

ColePens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 07:29 AM
  #112
Tender Rip
No cap on coaching!
 
Tender Rip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 12,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColePens View Post
I said it early in the thread and I'll say it again - I just want #44 to hold himself accountable for his sloppy play. We NEED him to play to his level. If he continues at the level he's playing, he's worthless. He is really playing poor hockey.
For a long time to open this season, you of all people were raving about Orpik (more so Martin, granted) and that pairing.
Now he had a couple of bad games with the Montreal one being an epic disaster for him, and suddenly we're debating trading him? SID has bad weeks now and then!

Anyway, it isn't so much the notion of trading him. It would be different if those who argued that would have a provision that he was at least replaced by someone suitable to replace what is missed in the lineup. But that is not what most people are doing, and that's why its insane.

I would rather ADD an Orpik and a veteran forward than get Iginla and keep the D we have now. Ie. Regher plus Morrow for instance. That's surely be cheaper also, but as much as I'd love to get Iginla, there is no point if we have a terrible D.

Regher Letang
Orpik Martin
Despres Engelland
Eaton Bortuzzo

THAT is a playoff defense.

Tender Rip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 07:36 AM
  #113
IHWR
The Chiropractor
 
IHWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,388
vCash: 500
What TR said.

I love people who want to trade roster players for prospects or picks and who a relying on our prospect depth to step right in ASAP.

Me...I want to win the Stanley Cup every year that we have the two best players in the world in our lineup. You don't do that by building for the future.

Here's how every trade proposal should go: "Does this help us win the Stanley Cup this year?". If the answer is no...you don't make the trade.

Here's how every MAJOR trade proposal should go: "If we make this deal, do we win the Stanley Cup this year?". If the answer is yes, you make the trade.

Does acquiring Iginla result in us winning a Stanley Cup?

Does trading Orpik help or hurt the team's chances of winning the Cup?

Win now...always.

IHWR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 08:04 AM
  #114
ColePens
Global Moderator
Your Savior
 
ColePens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 32,307
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to ColePens
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
For a long time to open this season, you of all people were raving about Orpik (more so Martin, granted) and that pairing.
Now he had a couple of bad games with the Montreal one being an epic disaster for him, and suddenly we're debating trading him? SID has bad weeks now and then!

Anyway, it isn't so much the notion of trading him. It would be different if those who argued that would have a provision that he was at least replaced by someone suitable to replace what is missed in the lineup. But that is not what most people are doing, and that's why its insane.

I would rather ADD an Orpik and a veteran forward than get Iginla and keep the D we have now. Ie. Regher plus Morrow for instance. That's surely be cheaper also, but as much as I'd love to get Iginla, there is no point if we have a terrible D.

Regher Letang
Orpik Martin
Despres Engelland
Eaton Bortuzzo

THAT is a playoff defense.
Just because I write about them doesn't mean I don't have things in perspective. I don't think Orpik is too far into this season where he cannot turn around. I'm just saying he MUST turn around.

But you know me.. I think the system puts players in bad positions. But I don't want to take this thread down that dark....dark dark dark road.

But inevitably I agree that I hate the sudden "MUST TRADE!" or "SIGN FOR LIFE" type arguments. Those aren't for me. I think y'all know that by now.

ColePens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 08:10 AM
  #115
IcedCapp
IcedCapp The White
 
IcedCapp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IHWR View Post
I love people who want to trade roster players for prospects or picks
Has anyone said this regarding Orpik?

IcedCapp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 08:24 AM
  #116
HotCoffey
Registered User
 
HotCoffey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
So, you two envision that we go with a top pairing featuring a rookie who has played zero full games with Letang and has 35 games in the NHL, total. You think it is a fine idea to have Martin and Niskanen together for perhaps the softest shut down pairing in NHL history despite them having hardly ever played a game together, and then we go with Eaton who after being discarded by the Islanders after a poor season weren't picked up by anyone, and has now played two OK'ish games for the Pens and pair him with Engelland or Bortuzzo.
That's the backdrop to dealing our most physical D-man, a 20 minute per game top4 defender who wears an 'A'.

I suppose one guys opinion is as good as anyones.... but the thought of that D as our playoff defense makes me physically ill. I think you are nuts.

Furthermore, nobody should give a damn about which prospects we have who are not NHL ready when its time for the PLAYOFFS! It makes no core player replaceable THIS season.

If you want to get value for Orpik while creating space for our budding talent, you deal him after the season, when he still has a year on his contract. I can get on board that thought actually, at least it still leaves a deadline to add experience if it turns out we miss it.

But holy crap!
Enough with the chippyness, I don't need it to defend my position, you shouldn't either. Orpik is playing worst-on-the-team defense, the team which as you say has a D man no one wanted and is either untested or soft, but somehow having Orpik is a magical elixir to make all that better come playoff time. It's just not a solid argument. Everyone here understands what Brooks-y has done for the team. It's always about making that team better.

HotCoffey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 08:30 AM
  #117
IHWR
The Chiropractor
 
IHWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IcedCapp View Post
Has anyone said this regarding Orpik?
I've seen Dmitri Jaskin, Marcus Foligno and Magnus Paajarvi all brought up in this thread so far.

To be fair, I went back and re-read those posts and for the most part they were part of "packages" that saw us downgrade on D (Weber from Buffalo and Smid from Edmonton) to add that prospect to our pipeline.

IHWR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 08:34 AM
  #118
Jag68Sid87
Registered User
 
Jag68Sid87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 28,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
Regher Letang
Orpik Martin
Despres Engelland
Eaton Bortuzzo

THAT is a playoff defense.
For what playoff year, 2008? 2009 perhaps?


It seems we still haven't learned a damn thing from last spring. Orpik was one of the main culprits why we looked like a circus in the back end. Yes Fleury was another, but when was the last time you felt comfortable with Orpik on the ice against any quality forward? And while the Western Conference may boast the better teams, there are a LOT of quality forwards to contend with in the East.

Why don't we just continue to let history repeat itself. Let's just keep on with the belief that our '09 heros can still get it done when it matters...forgetting that it's going on four years now. Rinse. Repeat. Aw shucks we missed again.

Simon Despres is our best left defenseman right now. I don't expect Disco to understand this, but surely I expected more from our group here.

If we play Claude Giroux again in a best-of-seven series, or Steven Stamkos, or the Desharnais line, or Tyler Seguin, well then I want Despres on the ice. His skill level, PLUS SIZE, makes him the right man for the job. His future is ahead of him, and he's learning a lot this season and getting better every game. The last time we could say all of that about Orpik was when Olczyk was coaching. Orpik is OLD. He is not finished, but he's starting to get there.

This idea that we can't win without prominent young players making considerable contributions is totally laughable. And completely untrue.

The youth showed up against Philly last spring. The superstars show up against everybody. The veterans crapped the bed.

But yeah, let's keep Brooks Orpik and hope for another 1-minute shift of awesomeness.

2009. It's time we let go.

Jag68Sid87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 08:36 AM
  #119
Jag68Sid87
Registered User
 
Jag68Sid87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 28,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IHWR View Post
I've seen Dmitri Jaskin, Marcus Foligno and Magnus Paajarvi all brought up in this thread so far.

To be fair, I went back and re-read those posts and for the most part they were part of "packages" that saw us downgrade on D (Weber from Buffalo and Smid from Edmonton) to add that prospect to our pipeline.
A downgrade? Based on reputation, perhaps.

Jag68Sid87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 08:38 AM
  #120
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 17,285
vCash: 500
I'd agree that Despres has been outplaying and will likely continue to outplay Orpik from here on out.

At the very least, I think we'd be wise to start curbing Brooks' ice time and giving a bit more to Despres.

mpp9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 08:41 AM
  #121
HotCoffey
Registered User
 
HotCoffey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag68Sid87 View Post
For what playoff year, 2008? 2009 perhaps?


It seems we still haven't learned a damn thing from last spring. Orpik was one of the main culprits why we looked like a circus in the back end. Yes Fleury was another, but when was the last time you felt comfortable with Orpik on the ice against any quality forward? And while the Western Conference may boast the better teams, there are a LOT of quality forwards to contend with in the East.

Why don't we just continue to let history repeat itself. Let's just keep on with the belief that our '09 heros can still get it done when it matters...forgetting that it's going on four years now. Rinse. Repeat. Aw shucks we missed again.

Simon Despres is our best left defenseman right now. I don't expect Disco to understand this, but surely I expected more from our group here.

If we play Claude Giroux again in a best-of-seven series, or Steven Stamkos, or the Desharnais line, or Tyler Seguin, well then I want Despres on the ice. His skill level, PLUS SIZE, makes him the right man for the job. His future is ahead of him, and he's learning a lot this season and getting better every game. The last time we could say all of that about Orpik was when Olczyk was coaching. Orpik is OLD. He is not finished, but he's starting to get there.

This idea that we can't win without prominent young players making considerable contributions is totally laughable. And completely untrue.

The youth showed up against Philly last spring. The superstars show up against everybody. The veterans crapped the bed.

But yeah, let's keep Brooks Orpik and hope for another 1-minute shift of awesomeness.

2009. It's time we let go.

HotCoffey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 08:53 AM
  #122
UnderratedBrooks44
Registered User
 
UnderratedBrooks44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Miranda's house
Posts: 12,796
vCash: 500
Basically Orpik is just so bad right now that we wouldn't hurt our defense to put literally anyone in his place. That's what I'm hearing at least. We're really doing this? We're really wanting to trade the only top 4 worthy physical Dman we have because we're worried he may be aging normally? To each his own I guess......

UnderratedBrooks44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 08:59 AM
  #123
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 17,285
vCash: 500
I would've be shy about cutting his minutes down to 20/game max and give Despres more opportunity. That's where Im at.

mpp9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 09:10 AM
  #124
Richard
Registered User
 
Richard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 611
vCash: 500
Orpik was always one of the worst Penguin defenders in terms of positioning, stickwork and in front of the net play. He was so bad that he rarely killed penalties under MT. Now is a step slower and is clearly not as physical as he once was. Granted, he steps up in the playoffs physically-but the Penguins can and should use him as a tradable asset in gaining top flight talent to help the put this squad over the top.

Physical dmen are always overrated.

Richard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 09:28 AM
  #125
Jag68Sid87
Registered User
 
Jag68Sid87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 28,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderratedBrooks44 View Post
We're really wanting to trade the only top 4 worthy physical Dman we have because we're worried he may be aging normally?
We don't have a top-4 worthy physical D-man, THAT's the point. We used to. He's gone.

If your eyeballs see Orpik as anything more than what Deryk Engelland and Robert Bortuzzo currently provide, then perhaps I should set up an appointment with an optician today.

Jag68Sid87 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 06:57 AM.

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.