I though Manny had an offer from Atlanta for $2mill per? Or was that just rumor?
I hate to speculate, but its sounding more and more like Manny wanted top 6 money from Howson, which is crazy. I wish I knew what Howson offered him, and if he countered and for how much. 2 million is respectable money for Manny, considering how modest the contracts have been across the league this off season. He may not have the luxury of being picky at this point.
I forgot about Dubie, didn't he sign with the Wild? He and Mason became very good friends, but that's no reason to keep him. A puck went over Dubie's head and into the net, that was enough for Hitch...too small
I heard Novotny went to Europe.
So far:
Michael Peca: No offer
Jason Williams: Possible Red Wings
Manny Malhotra: No offer
Christian Backman: No offer
Tollefsen: Signed Flyers
Aaron Rome: Signed Canucks
Dubie: Signed Wild
I can't believe it if Malhotra isn't signed by next season, he's not that bad.
Novotny said in one Czech periodic that he has offers from a few teams from NHL but I do not know how is a situation now.
Part of me wants to re-sign Manny (sign him for a year at $2.1). I am concerned about our depth at center should we have another injury (cough cough Brassard) and I'd rather have him than Peca. But then another part of me (the more sensible side) would rather spend that money upgrading the blueline.
Part of me wants to re-sign Manny (sign him for a year at $2.1). I am concerned about our depth at center should we have another injury (cough cough Brassard) and I'd rather have him than Peca. But then another part of me (the more sensible side) would rather spend that money upgrading the blueline.
Considering we already have 16 forwards and 6 d men and we are currently overbudget, listen to your sensible side...
Our d situation is far more dire than our forward position.
Considering we already have 16 forwards and 6 d men and we are currently overbudget, listen to your sensible side...
Our d situation is far more dire than our forward position.
Sign him for one year at what we paid him last year, if he'll go for it. Manny would provide depth for the top lines and solve the problem of who will anchor the fourth line (my vote goes to Murray otherwise). I know he doesn't want to go to Atlanta. And I'd like a fourth line that deserves its minutes. With doubts as to where Chimmer/Modin/Torres/Filatov are going to land having an actual center might make us strong there.
Sign him for one year at what we paid him last year, if he'll go for it. Manny would provide depth for the top lines and solve the problem of who will anchor the fourth line (my vote goes to Murray otherwise). I know he doesn't want to go to Atlanta. And I'd like a fourth line that deserves its minutes. With doubts as to where Chimmer/Modin/Torres/Filatov are going to land having an actual center might make us strong there.
I believe he wants a pretty substantial raise and similar minutes to last year.
Thing is, we have to move beyond players like Manny and Williams if we are going to be better. Sooner or later we are going to have to start asking our young guys what they are potentially able to do.
I would like to have Manny AND Williams back but our teams' contract and money situation doesn't really allow for us to have that type of depth at this point. Once our younger guys are doing what they are supposed to be able to do and we are set in our top 6-9 we will be able to create more definition in our other line/lines. We still aren't clearly defined in our top 6...we are getting better but we aren't there yet.
Yes, I like a stop gap guy as much as the next guy, and if we had a roster spot and a contract for them that would be great, but we don't. We need to accept who we are and at what point we are in our development and just keep inching along and adding the correct pieces as we go.
I'm pretty sure Pahlsson can score just as little, win about as many faceoffs, and play as defensively as Manny did last year on the top line in the event of huge injury issues.
I thank Manny for his time here and his valuable assistance in helping get us into the playoffs. But I'm over him. Peca, well thanks for running your trap.
Quote:
Thing is, we have to move beyond players like Manny and Williams if we are going to be better. Sooner or later we are going to have to start asking our young guys what they are potentially able to do.
Given. I have no problem with young kids beating vets out in camp. It would be nice for one of these guys to suprise us. Beyond a role player or two, we haven't had anyone come in and really impress other then our recent high draft picks. So far our young role players are lucky to chip in much of anything. They certaintly can't be called on to fill in on some top 6 duty in the event of an injury.
So until then, I'll just have to be content hoping we pick up a flawed player that can chip in. Torres, Williams, anyone?
Part of me wants to re-sign Manny (sign him for a year at $2.1). I am concerned about our depth at center should we have another injury (cough cough Brassard) and I'd rather have him than Peca. But then another part of me (the more sensible side) would rather spend that money upgrading the blueline.
Umberger, Pahlsson, Vermette, Murray, maybe Filatov or Dorsett.
For example, Derick is injured. Our roster can be:
Where is problem? Do you think Malhotra is better center than Pahlsson or Umberger?
I think that is a situation the org is looking to avoid.
And Filatov in the top six again... Everyone is so eager to throw him up there when he's still likely a turnover king and defensive liability. I swear all some people look at is "talent". Has Zherdev (or Brule) taught us anything? /sigh
I think that is a situation the org is looking to avoid.
And Filatov in the top six again... Everyone is so eager to throw him up there when he's still likely a turnover king and defensive liability. I swear all some people look at is "talent". Has Zherdev (or Brule) taught us anything? /sigh
Filatov will be in the top 6. Maybe not the first few weeks, but I expect it by mid november. BTW, I dont think the poster was anymore eager on his impressions, than yours of "turnover machine", and "defensive liability" ? The guy has played 8 nhl games, and looked very good doing that. Had it not been for his contract, he would have played for the CBJ last year. Plus he did average a goal, every other game in his limited playing time last year.
Filatov will be in the top 6. Maybe not the first few weeks, but I expect it by mid november. BTW, I dont think the poster was anymore eager on his impressions, than yours of "turnover machine", and "defensive liability" ? The guy has played 8 nhl games, and looked very good doing that. Had it not been for his contract, he would have played for the CBJ last year. Plus he did average a goal, every other game in his limited playing time last year.
Bolded part(s) makes me want to go all Saint Dogbert.
I have no idea what your "all eager on his impressions" is even supposed to mean. Nor why it was a question on your part.
As far as your point on Filatov being top six next year. Could very well happen. Injuries will occur. Or a player could slump. Heck he could even force his way. It's just as likely (probably more) you could see Chimera, Modin, or Torres up there in those situations.
The problem is that people don't see (or don't care) his issues or consider whether he's ready to compete at that level for 82+ games. We don't have to rush him. We are no longer a rebuilding team.
I'm simply saying that orig poster thought he would be top 6. You indicated you cant understand this, or that we are eager for this to occur. I'm just pointing out that you may be "eager" in your label,when you say "turnover machine or defensive liability. Based on his first 8 games I thought the guy looked damn good. Its ok for us to think a young player can make the jump. I dont think our message board posts rush the development of this player. We will have to see how it shakes out.
I'm simply saying that orig poster thought he would be top 6. You indicated you cant understand this, or that we are eager for this to occur. I'm just pointing out that you may be "eager" in your label,when you say "turnover machine or defensive liability. Based on his first 8 games I thought the guy looked damn good. Its ok for us to think a young player can make the jump. I dont think our message board posts rush the development of this player. We will have to see how it shakes out.
No, I wasn't hasty or eager. It's part of why Hitch didn't give him many minutes while he was up here. He only played more then 10 minutes in one game. He was turning over the puck a lot and he was a defensive liablity. He wasn't an effective checker either.
Most people think he looked good up here because of that hat trick.
It's also ok for me to indicate that projecting him in the top 6 is a terribly flawed posistion.
The only jump this kid is going to be making is the one he earns.
What else is there? This is a forum of opinions. Did you really have to come in and point out the obvious? There is not fact yet unless you have a crystal ball. Howson has his opinion, so does Hitch. I'm sure they are waiting for camp to validate their opinions.
Having said that, if your trying to debate the position that Filatov is likely to play on the top six next year, without extreme circumstances, you are probably a bit delusional. Even if he comes in highly productive, even in game situations, the deck is stacked against him.
And, yes, it'd be awesome if he came in and scored 120 points playing next to Nash and lead us to the Cup. I'd happily eat that crow.
What else is there? This is a forum of opinions. Did you really have to come in and point out the obvious?
What needs to be clarified is how to tell which opinions are "flawed" or "delusional" and which, well, aren't.
__________________
"Every game, every point is a necessity." -- Ty Conklin, January 2007
"I'll have a chance to compete for the post of first issue. This is the most important thing." -- Sergei Bobrovsky, June 2012
What needs to be clarified is how to tell which opinions are "flawed" or "delusional" and which, well, aren't.
True enough. There are also the jerks that use those adjectives.
There has been near constant complaining about how Hitch handles younger players. Some of those complaints are false, some are not. However, we somehow think Hitch is going to some how treat Nikki different because of his talent level?
There is plenty of data on how Hitch handled Nikki last year (and some complaining on these forums) as well as many interviews with Hitch about Nikki (because of our scoring issues).
And yet some of us continue to think something different is going to happen because it's Nikki?
