HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

David Booth - All The Tools....No Toolbox

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-15-2013, 08:18 AM
  #801
rban*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,894
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by biturbo19 View Post
So Booth has increased the 'shots directed' stats for Kesler and Higgins? You don't say? You're pedalling a stat that may as well be custom tailored for Booth's 'head down' SKATE AND SHOOT PUCKS YA!!!! style of gameplay. Of course it's going to look flattering.

Directing pucks towards the net is absolutely NOT chemistry. Chemistry is what you see with that 'Speed Line' we have right now. Raymond/Schroeder/Hansen. They're generating QUALITY scoring opportunities, even when no shot results. Probably at a rate that exceeds what their Corsi stats would suggest even. They're not just throwing pucks on net...they're generating legitimate scoring opportunities. If your idea of 'chemistry' shows up on a Corsi spreadsheet...i think you're completely misrepresenting the term. And imo, might be completely missing the boat on the game of hockey. I might suggest the game of baseball as a fun sport to follow in that manner.




Again, if the sum total of the 'objective data' is advanced metrics like Corsi stats...then yes, i'd expect and hope that Gillis is operating with at least a substantial degree of 'subjectivity' involved. And more than that...are goals and assists not 'objective measures' anymore? I would argue those are THE MOST objective measures of play. There is nothing subjective about goals/assists/points. Either the puck is in the net...or it's not. You can't really argue against the validity of those statistics like you can with others.

If being a GM consisted of monitoring and assembling the greatest 'advanced metrics' team based on prior results...most teams would be better off letting Hal the computer run their franchise. But that is absolutely not the case.




While i would absolutely agree that Gillis and Gilman have shown to be very skilled in manipulating the salary cap, negotiating deals with low cap hits, and working from an 'internal salary cap'...they do still have some misses on the board. And more importantly, when you start looking at the number of NTCs on this team...i think that's pretty revealing of their 'secret weapon'. They've been trading flexibility for small cap savings. Other GMs haven't necessarily been so willing to permanently lock in half their team for half a decade for a $500k savings per deal.




Do you honestly believe that Booth was brought in at $4.2M per year to maintain the 'Status Quo' though? Because i certainly don't. Booth was brought in for his upside beyond that 20g status quo. THAT is what made the big price tag worthwhile...the potential that he's a 30g guy. $4.2M would be a steal for a 30g guy who does other things...but Booth does one thing, and that is shoot the puck and hopefully score goals. As such...he's worth that $4.2M if he does more than score ~20g per year. But otherwise...? You can get 20g out of a Higgins at $1.9M. Ryan Jones in Edmonton can pot nearly 20g if that's all you expect out of him.

There's nothing wrong with being a 20g scorer. That has value. But ultimately, Booth wasn't moved for spare parts because he was producing to $4.2M value long-term. Gillis lucked upon a potential 'buy low' option in Booth who was underperforming for his big contract in Florida...bought in because he offered big upside. But the fact that Booth has failed to outperform his 'underperforming' Florida results takes a big ol' sledgehammer to the idea of any real 'upside' there. It's becoming clear that Booth wasn't 'underperforming' in Florida at ~20g production...he was just playing, as you suggest...exactly at par for what Booth is as a player. Thus, take away the 30g 'upside' and you've got an overpaid player who does essentially one thing...and has been very inconsistent even in doing that here.

It's not good value.
Booth must, in addition to 20 goals, be extremely physical and hard hitting, he is no good as a soft 20 goal scorer or even a soft 30 goal scorer. The physicality MUST be there or he's not worth it.
\

rban* is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 11:03 AM
  #802
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,566
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Corsi For is raw shot differential. Which means Kesler and Booth, when together, direct 10% more shots for over against, than when apart. Meaning, they are greater than the sum of their parts when together. That's chemistry. Your counter is that these extra shots are of a lower quality, and I will get into that later...

By comparison though, on shot differential, the Sedins are at 59% when they are on the ice. That's really strong. Booth+Kesler are at 60% without adjusted Ozone starts, which is also damned good. They aren't wizards like the twins, but what they are doing per the objective data is very encouraging.
I'm far from an expert on hockey stats, but my understanding is that shots directed at the net is used as a proxy for offensive zone time, the idea being that if you have puck possession in the offensive zone, you are probably going to be directing shots towards the net. The problem with David Booth is that he directs a lot of shots in the general direction of the net, but doesn't generate any sustained offensive zone time. My observation is that he takes a lot of low percentage shots that are essentially turn-overs (but are not counted as such statistically). Shots directed at the net, in the case of Booth, doesn't equate to offensive zone time.

For example - coming down the left wing side (as a LH shot), shooting from the top of the circle, outside the hash marks. On the strong side (shooting side) you don't have the body angle for a slap shot, and there are really only 2 shots on a competent goalie - short side high and far side low pad. Both are fairly low percentage. If you miss short side, the puck is going to ring around and go out of the zone on the far side. Far side low pad is all about generating a rebound because if the goalie squares up to the shot, the rebound will come out into the slot.

A better play is to either take the puck deep and start a cycle, dump it to the far corner for a line mate or stop up short and hit the trailer at the blue line. Booth always takes the shot. The only way this early shot results in zone time is if he generates a rebound in the slot or misses far side and the puck is retrieved in the corner. The one thing Booth does well in this situation is he shoots right at the goalie and generates an offensive zone faceoff (which are generally taken by the Sedins).

On the off wing side there are more options because the shooting angles are way better. If you cut to the middle, your body angle is perfectly positioned to step into a slap shot, you can get off a quick wrister on net with a far better angle than on your shooting side wing, or you can dump, either diagonally or around the boards into the far corner where a charging winger can retrieve it.

Modern, structured defensive systems are designed to prevent creative play in neutral zone. They force players to do what David Booth does best - straight ahead up the wing, go wide and take a low percentage shot from a bad angle. But if you have to enter on your strong side, the idea is to get the puck in deep, forecheck and try to cycle the puck. But Booth is terrible on the cycle. He gets picked out of the play and is unable to read off his line mates.

LeftCoast is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 07:12 PM
  #803
Ronning On Empty
Moderator
Formerly BleachClean
 
Ronning On Empty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
I'm far from an expert on hockey stats, but my understanding is that shots directed at the net is used as a proxy for offensive zone time, the idea being that if you have puck possession in the offensive zone, you are probably going to be directing shots towards the net. The problem with David Booth is that he directs a lot of shots in the general direction of the net, but doesn't generate any sustained offensive zone time. My observation is that he takes a lot of low percentage shots that are essentially turn-overs (but are not counted as such statistically). Shots directed at the net, in the case of Booth, doesn't equate to offensive zone time.

His shot totals and scoring chances are both being tracked. CanucksArmy is a resource here. In the 10 games played this year, for instance, I would wager that he had the most scoring chances of all players in total, not just shots.

Let's entertain that shots directed is not related to Ozone time. If Booth gets as many shots and scoring chances as he does without helping maintain Ozone time, then his totals are miraculous IMO. It would mean that he is creating the volume he does by strictly rushing in and out of the zone and little to no possession time. Amazing.


Quote:
For example - coming down the left wing side (as a LH shot), shooting from the top of the circle, outside the hash marks. On the strong side (shooting side) you don't have the body angle for a slap shot, and there are really only 2 shots on a competent goalie - short side high and far side low pad. Both are fairly low percentage. If you miss short side, the puck is going to ring around and go out of the zone on the far side. Far side low pad is all about generating a rebound because if the goalie squares up to the shot, the rebound will come out into the slot.

A better play is to either take the puck deep and start a cycle, dump it to the far corner for a line mate or stop up short and hit the trailer at the blue line. Booth always takes the shot. The only way this early shot results in zone time is if he generates a rebound in the slot or misses far side and the puck is retrieved in the corner. The one thing Booth does well in this situation is he shoots right at the goalie and generates an offensive zone faceoff (which are generally taken by the Sedins).

On the off wing side there are more options because the shooting angles are way better. If you cut to the middle, your body angle is perfectly positioned to step into a slap shot, you can get off a quick wrister on net with a far better angle than on your shooting side wing, or you can dump, either diagonally or around the boards into the far corner where a charging winger can retrieve it.

Modern, structured defensive systems are designed to prevent creative play in neutral zone. They force players to do what David Booth does best - straight ahead up the wing, go wide and take a low percentage shot from a bad angle. But if you have to enter on your strong side, the idea is to get the puck in deep, forecheck and try to cycle the puck. But Booth is terrible on the cycle. He gets picked out of the play and is unable to read off his line mates.

Good breakdown of play.

However, I disagree with your conclusions.

Booth doesn't always shoot. We saw with Kassian that if a player is parallel to him on the rush, he will try to make plays. Kassian would come over and give him an option. It's just that with this system, the wingers are often left on their own on the break out. The centre often is too deep, or the wingers are stationary while the centre is moving. Which is OK because all the Canucks are trying to do is to transition the puck into the Ozone.

I'm not sure I agree that the optimum choice on the rush is to begin the cycle and not try to create a rebound?

Booth is not terrible on the cycle. His size and battle level help him on the boards. Granted, his cycle game may be simpler than other forwards, but he still helps contribute, which is what I think feeds into his possession game/Ozone TOI.

Basically, for possession based hockey, Booth is damned good. Is he a great cycler? No. Is he creative off the rush? No. But when the game is played "heavy", he's exactly what you want. He transitions the puck into the Ozone like no other on the team, and once there, his size+speed+battle make him a factor no matter how bland his style.

Ronning On Empty is online now  
Old
04-16-2013, 12:56 PM
  #804
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,566
vCash: 500
^^ I suppose it all depends on which David Booth we see. He was really good for stretches last season and it's probably unfair to judge him on his 12 games recovering from injury.

On the Pro side of the equation - he is very good at carrying the puck with speed and gaining the zone. Because he shoots a lot, he also generates offensive zone face-offs. He brings a physical elements that Raymond, Schroeder and Roy lack which, in a 7 game series can wear down defenders. He plays a simple straight ahead game and relies on speed, strength and shooting.

I'll accept that his board work is not a negative. He is not very good on the cycle, but he is strong and not easily pushed off the puck.

On the Con side, he is not a very good passer, nor is he creative with the puck. He is not a liability, but is not strong defensively and doesn't PK very well. I don't know what type of centre would have good chemistry with Booth. Schroeder seemed to do very well at times hitting fast wingers such as Hansen and Raymond with stretch passes. Kesler is a shoot first centre who likes to have the puck on his stick, so is not the best match for Booth.


Where my thinking is at this point is that next season, we have to make a choice between:
  • Booth at $4.2M is a 40 to 50 point, 20 goal, big, fast, physical winger with limited play making and defensive skills.
  • Raymond at (likely) $3M is a 40 to 50 point 20 goal, fast, creative winger who is very good defensively but is not at all physical.
  • Roy at (likely) $5M is a 50 - 60 point, 20+ goal, smallish, creative play making centre who is decent defensively,decent at face-offs and can be played on the wing, 1st line (in a pinch), 2nd line, 3rd line and on the PK and PP.

Realistically, we can only afford to sign 1 of these.

Raymond is the value proposition. He has bounced back from 2 brutal and injury filled seasons, but questions remain as to whether he can be effective in the playoffs when the physical intensity picks up.

Booth is over paid for his production but he is under contract for next year. His time in Vancouver has been plagued by injuries, but if he is healthy and in shape for the playoffs, his physical intensity will be appreciated.

Roy is a UFA and is probably going to demand $5M or more. We can't realistically go beyond $5M. He brings a lot of flexibility to the lineup where we sorely miss the depth at centre. He also makes the 2nd unit PP dangerous and if we want to load up the 2nd line he could play on the wing (or move Kesler to wing). If we have injuries at the C position, Roy is the best hedge.

If we retain Booth or Raymond it likely means Jordon Schroeder is our everyday 3rd line C. He's shown glimpses of this, has really picked up his play at the AHL level and maybe he is ready for this next year.

LeftCoast is offline  
Old
04-22-2013, 10:14 PM
  #805
vanuck
#Gaunce4GM
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taelin View Post
I saw that too; good on him to take on the haters!

The guy had asked Booth what he was going to do with his buyout money.
It really highlights the fact that we have some real idiots in this fanbase. Internet brings out the worst in some people.

I mean, if you're a Canucks fan, you want the team - and its players - to do well right? Forget timelines and everything else; it's not impossible for him to be back next season. How can saying that kind of crap be anything but a negative going forward? If you were face to face with the guy, would you still have the balls to say that?

vanuck is offline  
Old
04-22-2013, 10:54 PM
  #806
Bim Jenning
It's Aquilinis fault
 
Bim Jenning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vancouver, Wa
Country: United States
Posts: 9,052
vCash: 500
Need to buy him out in the offseason since the cap is going down. Ballard too.

Bim Jenning is offline  
Old
04-23-2013, 12:40 AM
  #807
Sharpshooter
Registered User
 
Sharpshooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 13,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CASUAL KEV View Post
Need to buy him out in the offseason since the cap is going down. Ballard too.

Sharpshooter is offline  
Old
04-23-2013, 12:48 AM
  #808
Nucker101
Sharks Bandwagon
 
Nucker101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 8,240
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanuck View Post
It really highlights the fact that we have some real idiots in this fanbase. Internet brings out the worst in some people.

I mean, if you're a Canucks fan, you want the team - and its players - to do well right? Forget timelines and everything else; it's not impossible for him to be back next season. How can saying that kind of crap be anything but a negative going forward? If you were face to face with the guy, would you still have the balls to say that?
Totally agree. Hate those type of "fans".

Nucker101 is offline  
Old
04-24-2013, 12:08 PM
  #809
moog35
Registered User
 
moog35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,558
vCash: 500
Roy is the type of centre that Booth would beed on his line, unfortunately for Booth I doubt he will get the chance to play with him

moog35 is offline  
Old
04-24-2013, 12:11 PM
  #810
Eddy Punch Clock
FIRE AND FURY
 
Eddy Punch Clock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chillbillyville
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,966
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by moog35 View Post
Roy is the type of centre that Booth would beed on his line, unfortunately for Booth I doubt he will get the chance to play with him
Maybe Roy signs as a FA with he same team that picks up Booth after we buy him out.

Eddy Punch Clock is offline  
Old
04-24-2013, 11:59 PM
  #811
Lonny Bohonos
$15mil Mentor-pede
 
Lonny Bohonos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: United Nations
Posts: 15,919
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
^^ I suppose it all depends on which David Booth we see. He was really good for stretches last season and it's probably unfair to judge him on his 12 games recovering from injury.

On the Pro side of the equation - he is very good at carrying the puck with speed and gaining the zone. Because he shoots a lot, he also generates offensive zone face-offs. He brings a physical elements that Raymond, Schroeder and Roy lack which, in a 7 game series can wear down defenders. He plays a simple straight ahead game and relies on speed, strength and shooting.

I'll accept that his board work is not a negative. He is not very good on the cycle, but he is strong and not easily pushed off the puck.

On the Con side, he is not a very good passer, nor is he creative with the puck. He is not a liability, but is not strong defensively and doesn't PK very well. I don't know what type of centre would have good chemistry with Booth. Schroeder seemed to do very well at times hitting fast wingers such as Hansen and Raymond with stretch passes. Kesler is a shoot first centre who likes to have the puck on his stick, so is not the best match for Booth.


Where my thinking is at this point is that next season, we have to make a choice between:
  • Booth at $4.2M is a 40 to 50 point, 20 goal, big, fast, physical winger with limited play making and defensive skills.
  • Raymond at (likely) $3M is a 40 to 50 point 20 goal, fast, creative winger who is very good defensively but is not at all physical.
  • Roy at (likely) $5M is a 50 - 60 point, 20+ goal, smallish, creative play making centre who is decent defensively,decent at face-offs and can be played on the wing, 1st line (in a pinch), 2nd line, 3rd line and on the PK and PP.

Realistically, we can only afford to sign 1 of these.

Raymond is the value proposition. He has bounced back from 2 brutal and injury filled seasons, but questions remain as to whether he can be effective in the playoffs when the physical intensity picks up.

Booth is over paid for his production but he is under contract for next year. His time in Vancouver has been plagued by injuries, but if he is healthy and in shape for the playoffs, his physical intensity will be appreciated.

Roy is a UFA and is probably going to demand $5M or more. We can't realistically go beyond $5M. He brings a lot of flexibility to the lineup where we sorely miss the depth at centre. He also makes the 2nd unit PP dangerous and if we want to load up the 2nd line he could play on the wing (or move Kesler to wing). If we have injuries at the C position, Roy is the best hedge.

If we retain Booth or Raymond it likely means Jordon Schroeder is our everyday 3rd line C. He's shown glimpses of this, has really picked up his play at the AHL level and maybe he is ready for this next year.
I those are the three options then its Roy.

The mantra is: center depth, center depth, center depth oummmmmmm

Lonny Bohonos is online now  
Old
06-03-2013, 06:08 PM
  #812
moog35
Registered User
 
moog35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,558
vCash: 500
So does Booth get bought out?

moog35 is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 06:13 PM
  #813
Nuckles
Bleed Assets E'ryday
 
Nuckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Benning's empty head
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by moog35 View Post
So does Booth get bought out?
I doubt it, I think Gillis gives him one more season. If he struggles again and we haven't used both our buyouts this summer, then I think he get's bought out next summer.

__________________

Fire Benning. Fire Linden. Fire Desjardins. Hire competent people.
Nuckles is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 06:26 PM
  #814
Scurr
Bear G
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,064
vCash: 500
No chance Booth gets bought out now or next offseason. Somebody will want him if we decide we don't.

Scurr is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 06:36 PM
  #815
Virtanen2Horvat
BoHorvat53
 
Virtanen2Horvat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,288
vCash: 500
When I look at this situation I look at it as he didn't really get a chance if you think about it. All these years he has been battered with injuries meaning he hasn't got the chance to prove his self. If Booth gets over his injury and has some rest which I am pretty sure he will and gets a chance here in Vancouver I think he will have a solid season. Look at him first year in Vancouver he didn't do too bad so he gets a chance this year if he stays, and he fails to do well then well bye. He has only had two seasons in Vancouver 1st one he did well and well this year was rough with getting back from a injury and high expectations and the lockout which effects timing.

EDIT: Also we are getting young and Booth is 28 which is not too bad.


Last edited by Virtanen2Horvat: 06-03-2013 at 07:04 PM.
Virtanen2Horvat is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 06:57 PM
  #816
PG Canuck
Moderator
 
PG Canuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Prince George, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 43,945
vCash: 500
Gillis won't buyout Booth so soon - he'll keep him around for as long as possible, as long as Booth is worth keeping around. He's essentially played only one season here so far, Gillis will want to see more than that.

PG Canuck is online now  
Old
06-03-2013, 07:13 PM
  #817
vanuck
#Gaunce4GM
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,132
vCash: 500
Agreed, I don't think he'll be bought out. Injuries not his fault or anything. Expect to see him bounce back next year.

vanuck is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 07:36 PM
  #818
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 18,125
vCash: 500
Wouldn't be surprised to see him packaged up and used to acquire another teams buyout. Maybe with Luongo for Dipietro+.

The Canucks apparently want to change the look up front. That will be tough to do with Booth or Ballard returning. IMO Gillis will look to move both ex-Florida players.

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 07:39 PM
  #819
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,023
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Wouldn't be surprised to see him packaged up and used to acquire another teams buyout. Maybe with Luongo for Dipietro+.

The Canucks apparently want to change the look up front. That will be tough to do with Booth or Ballard returning. IMO Gillis will look to move both ex-Florida players.
what? booth has barely played. his mere being healthy would change the look up front considerably.

Verviticus is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 07:49 PM
  #820
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 18,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verviticus View Post
what? booth has barely played. his mere being healthy would change the look up front considerably.
I wouldn't say considerably. He doesn't improve the PP, the PK, add toughness or bring the playmaking ability the 2nd line could desperately use.

Then there's the question about durability. His head down, fly around the ice style, not unlike Taylor Hall isn't exactly suited to avoiding injury. His body doesn't seem to hold up to the game he wants to play.

The Canucks are better with Booth in the lineup but if they want to improve the forward corps, his salary may very well need to be cleared to do so. The cap is very tight and behind Ballard, he has the worst contract on the team. That will put a target on his back.

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 07:51 PM
  #821
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,023
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
I wouldn't say considerably. He doesn't improve the PP, the PK, add toughness or bring the playmaking ability the 2nd line could desperately use.

Then there's the question about durability. His head down, fly around the ice style, not unlike Taylor Hall isn't exactly suited to avoiding injury. His body doesn't seem to hold up to the game he wants to play.

The Canucks are better with Booth in the lineup but if they want to improve the forward corps, his salary may very well need to be cleared to do so. The cap is very tight and behind Ballard, he has the worst contract on the team. That will put a target on his back.
they need to find a forward for under 5m that is better than david booth without giving up assets they want to use to improve their team in the future. i dont think its possible

there might be an argument made for next year, but not this offseason

Verviticus is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 07:56 PM
  #822
Scurr
Bear G
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verviticus View Post
they need to find a forward for under 5m that is better than david booth without giving up assets they want to use to improve their team in the future. i dont think its possible

there might be an argument made for next year, but not this offseason
I'd give David Clarkson his money. Jerome Iginla too.

Scurr is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 08:01 PM
  #823
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 18,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verviticus View Post
they need to find a forward for under 5m that is better than david booth without giving up assets they want to use to improve their team in the future. i dont think its possible

there might be an argument made for next year, but not this offseason
I would be willing to bet Gillis will tender offers to Clarkson and Clowe if they reach free agency. Ryder, Iginla and Horton as well are likely on Gillis' radar.

Gillis needs to get creative this offseason and change the look up front. Even though they're implying they're not going to make changes to the core, I don't know if I believe it. When you go 1-10 in your last 11 playoff games, all bets are off.

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 08:01 PM
  #824
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,023
vCash: 500
i wouldnt do iginla and clarkson would probably be a wash. that said if you can trade booth for a soda and then get an equivalent for the same price on the market that is a good choice

Verviticus is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 08:10 PM
  #825
Scurr
Bear G
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verviticus View Post
i wouldnt do iginla and clarkson would probably be a wash. that said if you can trade booth for a soda and then get an equivalent for the same price on the market that is a good choice
Why not? If Iggy doesn't get his cup this year, I'd go full court press on him. Blank cheque, keys to the city, etc.

Scurr is offline  
Closed Thread

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 04:00 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.