HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Robert Lang

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-10-2006, 09:58 PM
  #26
The Amity Affliction
Chasing Ghosts
 
The Amity Affliction's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 9,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
You're offering Montoya and a first. That certainly is giving up youth for age for a stop-gap guy (as you said). So that's two young assets for a guy who will conceivably not be a Ranger a year or two from now.
That wasn't the question.

The question was, am I suggesting to bring in a team full of veterans? The answer is obviously no.

I advocated bringing in a stop-gap center in favor of not rushing the youth.

Who's to say that the 1st rounder will be the asset? Weren't you one of the people who said that first rounders aren't sure things? So who's to say that the first rounder is an "asset?" That all depends on the development.

The Amity Affliction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2006, 10:00 PM
  #27
The Amity Affliction
Chasing Ghosts
 
The Amity Affliction's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 9,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
Bringing Lang in wouldn't be the worst move in the world. He fits the team and if he can be had for a song why not?

I have to laugh when I see people post "Wow and so endeth the rebuild."

If Lang comes in and helps the Rangers take that next step it would end the rebuild. Not all the youth is going to be Rangers some talented young players are going to be traded for NHL vets. This isn't the first year of the rebuild coming up it's the third year of the rebuild.

People that want to bring Brian Leetch back (who doesn't fit the team) mock the guys that want to bring players that would fit the team...

Wow what irony..
Thank you, someone who sees my point.

We rush the youth, we screw everything up. Didn't everyone learn from the Manny Malhotra episode? I thought that was a good lesson, but I guess not.

The Amity Affliction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2006, 10:04 PM
  #28
The Amity Affliction
Chasing Ghosts
 
The Amity Affliction's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 9,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones
Well Rodent there seem to be some here who think all the personnel decisions are made only after JJ gives them the okay. I don't really believe it but to me that is where at least part of this thread has been going. I don't mind the idea of the Rangers brass checking with Jaromir if he knows something about a player they're interested in but at the end of the day Jaromir is a player--not just any player naturally but he has his place and that is the way it should be. This business of trading Montoya for a 36 year old would be insane.
Like I said, I was off in my analysis. I wouldn't trade Montoya, unless we got something with Lang. Straight up, never. But if we were to get a top notch prospect and a pick in the deal as well, I think I'd do it.

A lot of you people just saw Robert Lang and stopped reading, I never said Montoya for him straight up.

The Amity Affliction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2006, 10:31 PM
  #29
kovy1335
Registered User
 
kovy1335's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Cranberry Twp.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,854
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to kovy1335
I don't think you want to underestimate what a power play lineup consisting of Straka, Lang, and Jagr would do to teams. Those three players have established chemistry already. Then picture your first two lines as Prucha-Nylander-Jagr, Straka-Lang-Sykora. Looks pretty sick to me.

I don't know if Rucchin, Rucinsky, and Hossa are sticking around, but if those are the top 9 forwards you have to choose from, that is some incredible scoring depth.

kovy1335 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2006, 11:02 PM
  #30
Geogaddi
Registered User
 
Geogaddi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 1,401
vCash: 500
Ok, I can see Lang landing here. He was Stellar with Jags back in D.C and could be a force to reckon with here. But for whom you mentioned we deal to get him i disagree with. The Red Wings got Lang From the Caps (after one of his best seasons) for Fleischmann, a 1st round and 4th round pick. I know you were thinking wrong when you said the deal initially, so ill give ya a break. But in no way, after a sub-par season by lang, do we give up that much for him. I can see us parting with Betts/Moore and a 2/3 rd round pick since we are taking on the salary. maybe even a little more. But No major piece of the puzzle will be leaving our hands.

Geogaddi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2006, 11:47 PM
  #31
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonzai12
Ok, I can see Lang landing here. He was Stellar with Jags back in D.C and could be a force to reckon with here. But for whom you mentioned we deal to get him i disagree with. The Red Wings got Lang From the Caps (after one of his best seasons) for Fleischmann, a 1st round and 4th round pick. I know you were thinking wrong when you said the deal initially, so ill give ya a break. But in no way, after a sub-par season by lang, do we give up that much for him. I can see us parting with Betts/Moore and a 2/3 rd round pick since we are taking on the salary. maybe even a little more. But No major piece of the puzzle will be leaving our hands.

How about Lang and Bootland to Rangers for Pock, Betts, Hossa and 2ed in 06? This also frees up roster space for Dubinsky, Dawes to make the team along with Immonen, Helminen.

Straka Nylander Jagr
Prucha Lang Sykora
Dawes Immonen Ward
Hollweg Moore/Helminen Ortmeyer

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 12:03 AM
  #32
Geogaddi
Registered User
 
Geogaddi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 1,401
vCash: 500
Honestly i dont know much about Bootland. What kind of a game does he play? Giving up Pock, i'd rather not as he really seems ready to take a spot in the Rangers Line-up next season. As for Hossa going there, i see him as a player Holand would take a gamble on, so i wouldnt mind it. Also during the playoffs, I give Hossa credit as he stepped up his game, not so much in the point department, but through his hustle and energy he tried to feed to the other players. But a deal around what you stated i can see possibly happening. as for the lines...glad to see Arnott not being plugged into the 2nd center position from ya

Geogaddi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 12:16 AM
  #33
Draft Guru
Registered User
 
Draft Guru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 6,850
vCash: 920
Well, I'm sure this has probably been said numerous times but I don't feel like reading through this entire thread.

Why on earth would a rebuilding franchise deal one of their top prospects PLUS a 1st round pick for a "stop-gap" center? Especially when potentially better ones can be had through free agency for just cash. If you want a stop-gap center, just sign one.

Draft Guru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 12:23 AM
  #34
Draft Guru
Registered User
 
Draft Guru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 6,850
vCash: 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99
Thank you, someone who sees my point.

We rush the youth, we screw everything up. Didn't everyone learn from the Manny Malhotra episode? I thought that was a good lesson, but I guess not.
SOS said that if Lang can be had for a song, you do it. You proposed that we deal a top prospect and a 1st round pick for Lang. There's a big difference there.

And where do you get the idea that this team is going to rush the youth? How many of us wanted to see Immonen up all season, or at least earlier than he was recalled? The last thing this team is going to do is rush any prospect, and that has been pretty evident under Sather and Renney. So I have no idea where your fear of ruining prospects comes from. You're living in 1998.

Bringing up the Malhotra fiasco is completely erroneous. That was the Muckler/Smith era. There's new cheriff's in town that know what they're doing.

This is the new economic era of the NHL. No team is going to give up a top prospect and a 1st round pick for an aging center who's on the decline and has a big contract. The Flyers had to give a 3rd round pick WITH Jeremy Roenick in return for nothing from the Kings, just to get rid of his 5 million salary.


Last edited by Draft Guru: 06-11-2006 at 12:29 AM.
Draft Guru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 12:24 AM
  #35
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonzai12
Honestly i dont know much about Bootland. What kind of a game does he play? Giving up Pock, i'd rather not as he really seems ready to take a spot in the Rangers Line-up next season. As for Hossa going there, i see him as a player Holand would take a gamble on, so i wouldnt mind it. Also during the playoffs, I give Hossa credit as he stepped up his game, not so much in the point department, but through his hustle and energy he tried to feed to the other players. But a deal around what you stated i can see possibly happening. as for the lines...glad to see Arnott not being plugged into the 2nd center position from ya

Lang is better player and better on faceoffs and defensivly and would fit with the other czechs. Bootland in the AHL had 27 goals 29 assist 56 pts and 390 pim +12 11 powerplay goals.
http://griffinshockey.com/team/roster/?id=26

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 12:27 AM
  #36
Draft Guru
Registered User
 
Draft Guru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 6,850
vCash: 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99

The question was, am I suggesting to bring in a team full of veterans? The answer is obviously no.

I advocated bringing in a stop-gap center in favor of not rushing the youth.

Who's to say that the 1st rounder will be the asset? Weren't you one of the people who said that first rounders aren't sure things? So who's to say that the first rounder is an "asset?" That all depends on the development.
Well, we certainly wouldn't be rushing the youth - since it would now belong to Detroit. Let's not rush the youth, yet lets trade some of our most valuable assets away?

1st rounders aren't sure things, you are correct, but they still have value and you DO NOT just give them away. First round picks tend to be overrated in value on these boards, it is strange to see someone who thinks nothing of them.

There were 3 first round picks dealt this year...Carolina dealt theirs for Weight, Nashville dealt theirs for Witt, and Edmonton dealt theirs for Roloson. All 3 teams felt they were 1 player away from being a contender for the cup, and felt the risk was worth it. Have you seen a team deal a 1st round pick for a "stop-gap" player? I think not.

Draft Guru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 03:03 AM
  #37
Kostik
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 876
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99
Ok, the faceoffs part I agree with you on. The slow is iffy, and the average shot, definitely not.
well, shot is maybe above the average, but he is really getting slow...not good for new nhl

Kostik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 03:05 AM
  #38
Kostik
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 876
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mugerya
Am I the only one who doesn't like the idea of having even more Czechs on the team? I'd like a little diversity in the lineup and I am still not convinced that Jagr is the GM, but this offseason will settle this dispute. Montoya or a 1st or any top prospect is overpaying for a supposed stop-gap solution. Couple in the salary dump scenerio and it should be Detriot ponying up and not us if we decide to help them out. Montoya, if dealt, should be used to acquire a very good prospect or hopefully a player that will contribute for more than a season or two. The less NYR does this offseason the better.
i'm czech and i agree with you...

Kostik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 06:22 AM
  #39
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 13,499
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99
Like I said, I was off in my analysis. I wouldn't trade Montoya, unless we got something with Lang. Straight up, never. But if we were to get a top notch prospect and a pick in the deal as well, I think I'd do it.

A lot of you people just saw Robert Lang and stopped reading, I never said Montoya for him straight up.
Yeah we were maybe going to get Jimmy Howard along with him and I'd rather take my chances with Montoya and his development. Lang at 36 is not much of an option in a trade. He would be a solution for the present maybe--not for the future. We do not have enough depth behind Henrik and substituting Howard for Montoya is not going to make it better. Lang has also hit that age where the team holding his contract is responsible for its cap amount for its entire length whether he's skating in the AHL or not--see Devils and Mogilny, Malakhov. If Lang's game were to degenerate before our eyes (not an unusual circumstance for a player heading for 40) we would be stuck with him whether we like it or not which is to say if you're going to deal with a player like him you deal with him one year at a time to avoid future cap hits. So to me it's trading an elite for a good goaltending prospect and taking on an expensive and risky one year insurance option to fill a hole that as DG says can be filled with a UFA (if we need to) by just spending money.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 07:58 AM
  #40
shoothepuck
88
 
shoothepuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: upstate
Country: Italy
Posts: 12,197
vCash: 500
No reason to anything for Lang. While a stop-gap vet might be needed, Lang is old, not good on faceoffs and has a high pricetag. Trading away developing players ontop of it makes no sense.

shoothepuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 09:24 AM
  #41
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,352
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draft Guru
Well, I'm sure this has probably been said numerous times but I don't feel like reading through this entire thread.

Why on earth would a rebuilding franchise deal one of their top prospects PLUS a 1st round pick for a "stop-gap" center? Especially when potentially better ones can be had through free agency for just cash. If you want a stop-gap center, just sign one.

That's exactly the point. Well said, DG.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 10:16 AM
  #42
The Amity Affliction
Chasing Ghosts
 
The Amity Affliction's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 9,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draft Guru
Well, I'm sure this has probably been said numerous times but I don't feel like reading through this entire thread.

Why on earth would a rebuilding franchise deal one of their top prospects PLUS a 1st round pick for a "stop-gap" center? Especially when potentially better ones can be had through free agency for just cash. If you want a stop-gap center, just sign one.
I'll say this again, because NO ONE seems to get it...

Do you REALLY want to sign a question mark like Savard or Arnott to a near 6 million per year deal for about 5 years? That's what Savard wants, and I'd be surprised to see him resign for no less than 5.5 per. I'd much rather have Lang at 3.8 because playing with good friends like JJ and Straka could get him going again. Look at what JJ did for Straka and Nylander.

Potentially is the word, Savard and Arnott are HUGE question marks that want HUGE deals. Do you want to sign them to those deals, and not be able to do anything else with them in later years when their play isn't even a facsimile of what it should be? Then, they'll be untradable because no one will want their contracts, and even if we do, we're looking at eating half of their salary each year.

Remember, the financial aspect matters so much more under this new CBA. At least the draft happens every year. We can always fix our mistakes with prospects through there.

The Amity Affliction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 10:27 AM
  #43
The Amity Affliction
Chasing Ghosts
 
The Amity Affliction's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 9,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draft Guru
Well, we certainly wouldn't be rushing the youth - since it would now belong to Detroit. Let's not rush the youth, yet lets trade some of our most valuable assets away?

1st rounders aren't sure things, you are correct, but they still have value and you DO NOT just give them away. First round picks tend to be overrated in value on these boards, it is strange to see someone who thinks nothing of them.

There were 3 first round picks dealt this year...Carolina dealt theirs for Weight, Nashville dealt theirs for Witt, and Edmonton dealt theirs for Roloson. All 3 teams felt they were 1 player away from being a contender for the cup, and felt the risk was worth it. Have you seen a team deal a 1st round pick for a "stop-gap" player? I think not.
I didn't say all of it, if I mentioned one concrete piece, and two "abstract" - if you're willing to call them that at this point - pieces. Let's not get those two and the words "team" or "youth" - which would both generally mean a more broad spectrum - confused here.

It's not that I don't think nothing of first rounders, it's just that the draft is hit or miss, and people tend to forget this. They don't remember the Alexandre Daigles, Pat Falloons, and Chris Grattons of years past. Some people have a hard time accepting the fact that Jamie Lundmark is a bust. Some people forget about Pavel Brendl and Manny Malhotra in this forum, and I've mentioned Malhotra's name in this forum, and still, everyone wants to rush the young guns.

It's clear that a lot of you have not learned your lesson, but I think Slats has, and he'd be foolish to do what some of you are suggesting.

Quote:
Have you seen a team deal a 1st round pick for a stop-gap player? I think not.
Yes, I actually have, and you mentioned it. Doug Weight. What is he? He's a long term solution? No, he's a playoff rental, that's even WORSE than a stop-gap, because if you don't win the cup, he was used for an even shorter span of time, and on top of that, he's a UFA this year, something you have forgotten in your analysis. Weight specifically said that he wanted to go back to St. Louis as well, and I don't doubt it as his family is there.

Like I said, I was off in my analysis of Montoya and a 1st. I figured with Lang, it would take a little bit to get him. I forgot that Lang had a down year, and this would be a salary dump, which would allow the Rangers to force their hand. Lang could definitely be had for less than what I said. If I wanted Kronwall and Howard, I could make that deal, even without the 1st. Give them a 2nd rounder.

The Amity Affliction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 10:29 AM
  #44
The Amity Affliction
Chasing Ghosts
 
The Amity Affliction's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 9,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shoothepuck
No reason to anything for Lang. While a stop-gap vet might be needed, Lang is old, not good on faceoffs and has a high pricetag. Trading away developing players ontop of it makes no sense.
You think his pricetag is high at 3.8, that's a bargain for what he can put up. Look at Savard and Arnott... they're even bigger question marks, and Arnott isn't even a #1 center, and wants near 5 million. Savard will want 5.5-6mill+, and the bad part about that is, I'm not convinced that Savard isn't the bi-product of playing with Kovalchuk and Hossa.

The Amity Affliction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 11:56 AM
  #45
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 13,499
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99
You think his pricetag is high at 3.8, that's a bargain for what he can put up. Look at Savard and Arnott... they're even bigger question marks, and Arnott isn't even a #1 center, and wants near 5 million. Savard will want 5.5-6mill+, and the bad part about that is, I'm not convinced that Savard isn't the bi-product of playing with Kovalchuk and Hossa.
Savard needs finishers. Whether he has Jagr or Prucha or even Dawes to help him with that--that's exactly what those players are. I don't think it would be absolutely necessary (although it would be nice) for a Savard to produce the same numbers as he has if he's a No. 2 center. And there are other solutions than Lang, Arnott or Savard. In any case Montoya and/or another first to Detroit for a 36 year old Lang and/or Howard is ridiculous. It's throwing away our goaltending depth. It's throwing away youth. I'd go with Immonen before that.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 12:00 PM
  #46
FmmF3*
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOrtmeyer41
How about Lang and Bootland to Rangers for Pock, Betts, Hossa and 2ed in 06? This also frees up roster space for Dubinsky, Dawes to make the team along with Immonen, Helminen.

Straka Nylander Jagr
Prucha Lang Sykora
Dawes Immonen Ward
Hollweg Moore/Helminen Ortmeyer
JOrts, this is the first proposal youve posted

that I LOVE congrats!

FmmF3* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 12:43 PM
  #47
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by FmmF3
JOrts, this is the first proposal youve posted

that I LOVE congrats!

thanks, we need a spot for Staal and maybe one of Baranka, Liffiton. Pock is gonna be 25 soon and still dont know how to play defense that well. If we can move him to get a impact player that would fit well we gotta do it, same if we deal Pock to move up in the draft.

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 12:46 PM
  #48
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
my untouchables are (only prospects): Staal, Sauer, Dupont, Callahan, Dawes, Immonen, Genoway, Helminen, Dubinsky.

Players id move to move up in the draft (prospects & NHL players): Pock, Graham, Jessiman, Montoya, Betts, Rachuneks rights.


Anyone got updates on Guenin, Crabb or Potter signing a NHL contract with the Rangers????????

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 01:49 PM
  #49
Draft Guru
Registered User
 
Draft Guru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 6,850
vCash: 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99
It's not that I don't think nothing of first rounders, it's just that the draft is hit or miss, and people tend to forget this. They don't remember the Alexandre Daigles, Pat Falloons, and Chris Grattons of years past. Some people have a hard time accepting the fact that Jamie Lundmark is a bust. Some people forget about Pavel Brendl and Manny Malhotra in this forum, and I've mentioned Malhotra's name in this forum, and still, everyone wants to rush the young guns.

It's clear that a lot of you have not learned your lesson, but I think Slats has, and he'd be foolish to do what some of you are suggesting.
I don't think it's fair to take the opinions of one or two posters and then jump to a generalization that everyone on this board wants to rush our prospects, or that we don't remember Lundmark, Brendl and Malhotra, or that we forget that draft picks can and do bust. No one is disagreeing that the draft is "hit or miss", but any rebuilding franchise is going to acquire picks, not trade them. And the three players you mentioned, Daigle, Falloon and Gratton surely didn't live up to their pre-draft hype, but they still had NHL careers with some success.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99
Yes, I actually have, and you mentioned it. Doug Weight. What is he? He's a long term solution? No, he's a playoff rental, that's even WORSE than a stop-gap, because if you don't win the cup, he was used for an even shorter span of time, and on top of that, he's a UFA this year, something you have forgotten in your analysis. Weight specifically said that he wanted to go back to St. Louis as well, and I don't doubt it as his family is there.
Did you read what I wrote?

There were 3 first round picks dealt this year...Carolina dealt theirs for Weight, Nashville dealt theirs for Witt, and Edmonton dealt theirs for Roloson. All 3 teams felt they were 1 player away from being a contender for the cup, and felt the risk was worth it. Have you seen a team deal a 1st round pick for a "stop-gap" player? I think not.

Doug Weight is not a "stop-gap" player. A stop-gap player would be someone like Lang, who'd contribute on our top line for a year or two until a prospect is ready. Weight is not holding down someone's spot until they're ready in a year or two. Lang does not make us a contender, and certainly will not help bring us a Cup. I'd MUCH rather deal a 1st round pick for a playoff rental, if that one player would greatly improve our chances of winning the cup. Sure, there's the chance that you won't win the cup, but it's the risk that you take. And that particular risk has the greatest reward. I think you have your player classifications mixed up a bit. I'm not attacking your opinion of value, but I disagree here.

Draft Guru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2006, 01:52 PM
  #50
Draft Guru
Registered User
 
Draft Guru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 6,850
vCash: 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99
I'll say this again, because NO ONE seems to get it...

Do you REALLY want to sign a question mark like Savard or Arnott to a near 6 million per year deal for about 5 years? That's what Savard wants, and I'd be surprised to see him resign for no less than 5.5 per. I'd much rather have Lang at 3.8 because playing with good friends like JJ and Straka could get him going again. Look at what JJ did for Straka and Nylander.

Potentially is the word, Savard and Arnott are HUGE question marks that want HUGE deals. Do you want to sign them to those deals, and not be able to do anything else with them in later years when their play isn't even a facsimile of what it should be? Then, they'll be untradable because no one will want their contracts, and even if we do, we're looking at eating half of their salary each year.

Remember, the financial aspect matters so much more under this new CBA. At least the draft happens every year. We can always fix our mistakes with prospects through there.

Two questions.

First, why exactly are Savard and Arnott HUGE question marks? A huge question mark would be an aging 36 year old center on the decline, not a player who is in there prime. These two guys have played at a high level for a few years now and IMO, deserve a salary in the 4-5 million range.

Second, how can we fix our mistakes by drafting quality prospects if we're dealing away first round picks for players that don't fit into the team's long-term future? You can't draft a player if you don't have a draft pick.

Draft Guru 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 12:23 PM.

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.