HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Fleury NOT being sent to Cape Breton

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-12-2003, 03:22 AM
  #26
Evilo
Registered User
 
Evilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Country: France
Posts: 26,400
vCash: 432
You know I was never sold on Caron because he couldn't establish himself in the AHL.
But he WAS fantastic last year when he got some playing time.

So I'm not sure he's overrated.
Nobody said he was a starter already (except some trolls).

Could you come up with a list of "overrated Pens youngsters" though?
It's not an attack, I would be interested in seeing your list.

Evilo is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 08:25 AM
  #27
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
Hi, I am new here but I would like to point out a possibility to you Foppa and maybe one or two others on something. I have an opinion that you might just be taking something the entirely wrong way. I believe that people are saying that Fluery "could" go the same way as young players like Storr and others of his ilk. Not that they believe that they certainly will. I think that saying that Fluery has the same chances of making it as a playing like Heatley is certainly appropriate and so is saying that he could run into the same troubles as Storr and other highly touted young net minders before him is accurate as well.

You seem from this vantage point to be saying that there is no possible way to compare these players when there are several simmilarities and in those is where the comparisons are founded. Certainly fair.
Given that, i still feel that you are taking it wrongly to say that other posters are sayint that the Pens are *certainly saying* that the Pens are ruining Fluery, they are merely saying that it is a *possibility* that they are. To think that these posters are stereotyping is incorrect from where I am sitting. Of course, i could be wrong, but it sure looks like are making some major assumptions in what others are saying by making that statement.

I am new here and am from New Zealand so I have no real hockey league here to follow and only have been a fan of the game since 90 so I am sure that I could be wrong and just not understanding things perfectly and apologize if that is the case. I just think that it looks like you and a few others are making a black and white assumption and I am not seeing the same thing.

Comments?

punchy1 is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 08:27 AM
  #28
The Tang
I like gooooollllddd
 
The Tang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Pittsburgh. PA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy
Whoever negotiated that bonus structure for the Pens should be shot. There is virtually zero chance of any NHL goalie (even a bad one) not been able to acheive at least 2 of those targets in the first year.
Absolutly ridiculous.
Dipietro's contract was used as the basis as he too was a first overall pick and a goalie. basically, the only difference is base salary.

The Tang is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 08:42 AM
  #29
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
I think that in every contract that there should be easily achievable goals. We are talking about young players with developing skills and ego's. IF all of the goals are going to be in the catagory of exceptionally difficult to accomplish then you stand a chance of discouraging them. Setting high goals is a very good thing and you want to have some amazingly high ones in the deal as well. It is just that for every "you get an extra million if you win the vezina" clause I think there should be the odd "you get an extra 500k if you keep your gaa below 3.25) as well.

punchy1 is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 08:51 AM
  #30
Sammy*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by punchy1
I think that in every contract that there should be easily achievable goals. We are talking about young players with developing skills and ego's. IF all of the goals are going to be in the catagory of exceptionally difficult to accomplish then you stand a chance of discouraging them. Setting high goals is a very good thing and you want to have some amazingly high ones in the deal as well. It is just that for every "you get an extra million if you win the vezina" clause I think there should be the odd "you get an extra 500k if you keep your gaa below 3.25) as well.
Do you really think that a goalie who acheives two of
1) plays 1800 minutes,
2)has at least a 3.25 avg
3) has a 890 save percentage

should get a 4 mil bonus on top of a mil or so base .Frick, if the guy doesnt post way better numbers than those he should be playing in the ECHL.There wont be a #2 goalie in the league who wouldnt be eligible for that bonus.

Sammy* is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 09:02 AM
  #31
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
True, but I also think that if he isn't capable of achieving better than those stats that he won't be given the opportunity to make them. For example, if a player doesn't show that they will well exceede those easy bonuses then I believe that their coaches would see that well before either you or I would and that they would either be benched (preventing them from achieving the minutes) or sent down or released. The gm's certainly know what they are doing when they set those low goals and if they see a player doing that poorly and the reason lies within their own fault then I believe they would take care of it. If it isn't, for example in Fluerys case where he is playing behind a horrible team then the goals are there to do what I implied they could. Help develope a young players confidence and give him obtainable goals to build from. Certainly, I feel that coaches and gms will do a better job at determining rather or not a player is doing well enough to earn his shot at the money or wether he isn't than a bunch of armchair gms like us are capable of.

punchy1 is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 09:10 AM
  #32
Slats432
Registered User
 
Slats432's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,426
vCash: 500
Didn't see today's link posted. It is official he starts tonight.

http://tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=60278

Slats432 is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 09:24 AM
  #33
Sammy*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by punchy1
True, but I also think that if he isn't capable of achieving better than those stats that he won't be given the opportunity to make them. For example, if a player doesn't show that they will well exceede those easy bonuses then I believe that their coaches would see that well before either you or I would and that they would either be benched (preventing them from achieving the minutes) or sent down or released. The gm's certainly know what they are doing when they set those low goals and if they see a player doing that poorly and the reason lies within their own fault then I believe they would take care of it. If it isn't, for example in Fluerys case where he is playing behind a horrible team then the goals are there to do what I implied they could. Help develope a young players confidence and give him obtainable goals to build from. Certainly, I feel that coaches and gms will do a better job at determining rather or not a player is doing well enough to earn his shot at the money or wether he isn't than a bunch of armchair gms like us are capable of.
I doubt it works that simply that you can just send him down. So he wont acheive his minutes component. He sure as hell will acheive the GAA & sv pctg criteria.
You might as well give the guy 5 mil base with no bonus in his 1st year no matter how he performs cause there is zero chance he cant make his bonus.
I dont have a problem with reasonably easily obtainable bonuses, but this is frankly stupid.

Sammy* is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 12:23 PM
  #34
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
Your opinion is simply that, your opinion. We seem to see it from different sides of the fence.

punchy1 is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 05:20 PM
  #35
Foppa
Registered User
 
Foppa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Kansas City, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,084
vCash: 500
Punchy...the way you state it...I have no room to argue, its a fair and logical prediction to say you don't think the NHL is the best idea for Fleury's development right now.

I may have been wrong to use sterotyping as the phrase in this particular thread, but since it was learned that Fleury would be the Pens starting goalie, I have seen enough "what are they thinking??!?!?!?!?! they are ruining him!!!!!!!" posts to feel as though people are rushing to a conclusion that has more to do how many immediate past examples of ruining one can think of and a lot less to do with thinking of each player's development not as a trend but as an individual situation.

Neither side can offer 'proof' per say...but this is where I think the argument breaks down (and I am not talking about financially...maybe the Pens are in the wrong in terms of Fleury's contract...I dunno enough about that situation to comment). On one side you have people using the previous examples of other young goalies and players, saying its not good form to expose a young goalie to so much rubber so early on. Shock and awe so to speak. On the other, you have an entire multi-million dollar organization who's future on the ice, and thus their health off of it, rests heavily on the development of their young prodigy and they think this is the way to go.

As is painfully obvious, ineptitude can reach the highest levels and infiltrate a entire hierarchy of command. But in this case, I am going to rest my mantle on the organizations opinion on how to develop their player and not what has happened in the past to entirely different individuals. I may end up being entirely wrong. If this were New Jersey or Detroit or Colorado, maybe people would be more confident in the decision as a whole. And who could blame them...

Foppa is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 05:47 PM
  #36
The Tang
I like gooooollllddd
 
The Tang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Pittsburgh. PA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,141
vCash: 500
what peoiple dont realize is that Fleury played behind the junior equivelant o the Penguins teh last 2 years. he had nothing in front of him, and faced over 30 shots a game. its nothing new to him.

The Tang 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 08:23 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.