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.

Tor-Chi

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-20-2010, 12:10 PM
  #51
TML g u n n e R s*
EDC 2013
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Air Canada Center
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,011
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to TML g u n n e R s* Send a message via Yahoo to TML g u n n e R s* Send a message via Skype™ to TML g u n n e R s*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
Kaberle's D sucks and he isn't a better dman then Hjalmarsson or Campbell

He would be #5 on our depth chart
i suggest you go watch kaberle play, and edit this immediately. that just embarrass me to be on this board.

TML g u n n e R s* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 12:43 PM
  #52
Hawksfan2828
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 7,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13goleafsgo13 View Post
i suggest you go watch kaberle play, and edit this immediately. that just embarrass me to be on this board.
Hammer is way more valuable then Kaberle is.

Hell, you got Scotty Bowman touting Hammer as the next Salming or Lidstrom. At Hammers age thats quite the compliment from one of the greatest hockey minds the game has ever seen.

I would agree with Bowmans assessment as well, I think the Salming comparison is dead on. I think at some point over the next 4-5 years Hammer can be a Norris finalist. The kid is one hell of a hockey player.

Hawksfan2828 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 12:46 PM
  #53
wej20
Registered User
 
wej20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Swansea,UK
Country: Wales
Posts: 21,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawksfan2828 View Post
Hammer is way more valuable then Kaberle is.

Hell, you got Scotty Bowman touting Hammer as the next Salming or Lidstrom. At Hammers age thats quite the compliment from one of the greatest hockey minds the game has ever seen.

I would agree with Bowmans assessment as well, I think the Salming comparison is dead on. I think at some point over the next 4-5 years Hammer can be a Norris finalist. The kid is one hell of a hockey player.
Maybe more valuable to the Hawks but Kabs is more valuable in my opinion. Hjalmarsson is never going to put up enough offense to be considered for the Norris.

wej20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 12:54 PM
  #54
Kessel>Seguin +
Not Even A Big Fan!!
 
Kessel>Seguin +'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Ontario
Country: Cambodia
Posts: 4,757
vCash: 500
Campbell + Byfuglien for Kaberle & John Mitchell

Kessel>Seguin + is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 01:05 PM
  #55
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by juice1815 View Post
Campbell + Byfuglien for Kaberle & John Mitchell
So Leafs take on over $5million in salary for no improvement to the hockey team? Kaberle > Campbell, Byfuglien > Mitchell, they come close to offsettign each other.

Campbell or Byfuglien to Toronto should be non starters unless Jeff Finger is going the other way.

seanlinden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 01:35 PM
  #56
embracedbias
Registered User
 
embracedbias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Waterloo
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
Kaberle's D sucks and he isn't a better dman then Hjalmarsson or Campbell

He would be #5 on our depth chart
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawksfan2828 View Post
Hammer is way more valuable then Kaberle is.

Hell, you got Scotty Bowman touting Hammer as the next Salming or Lidstrom. At Hammers age thats quite the compliment from one of the greatest hockey minds the game has ever seen.

I would agree with Bowmans assessment as well, I think the Salming comparison is dead on. I think at some point over the next 4-5 years Hammer can be a Norris finalist. The kid is one hell of a hockey player.
Oh my ****ing lord.

Borje Salming in his first three NHL seasons:
73/74: 76 GP, 39 Pts
74/75: 60 GP, 37 Pts
75/76: 78 GP, 57 Pts

Niklas Lidstrom in his first three NHL seasons
91/92: 80 GP, 60 Pts
92/93: 84 GP, 41 Pts
93/94: 84 GP, 56 Pts

Tomas Kaberle in his first three NHL seasons
98/99: 57 GP, 22 Pts
99/00: 82 GP, 40 Pts
00/01: 82 GP, 45 Pts

Niklas Hjalmarsson in his first three NHL seasons
07/08: 13 GP, 1 Pt
08/09: 21 GP, 4 Pts
09/10: 77 GP, 17 Pts


Can this absurdity stop? What the **** is wrong with you people?

embracedbias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 01:41 PM
  #57
embracedbias
Registered User
 
embracedbias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Waterloo
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,917
vCash: 500
Not that it matters, but here's what Bowman actually said:

Quote:
On the broadcast tonight, Pat Foley was discussing how highly Scotty Bowman thought of Hjalmarsson, and the words that the former Detroit head honcho used were “reminds me of Nick Lidstrom“.

That praise may seem a little too glowing, or perhaps tainted a bit by proximity to the young man, but he displayed some toughness tonight that may at least have him meet Lidstrom in the grittiness factor.
Link

I can't find anything about Salming.

Goes to show how willing some people are to stretch the truth in order to fit their inane little arguments.

embracedbias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 01:51 PM
  #58
Hawksfan2828
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 7,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by embracedbias View Post
Oh my ****ing lord.

Borje Salming in his first three NHL seasons:
73/74: 76 GP, 39 Pts
74/75: 60 GP, 37 Pts
75/76: 78 GP, 57 Pts

Niklas Lidstrom in his first three NHL seasons
91/92: 80 GP, 60 Pts
92/93: 84 GP, 41 Pts
93/94: 84 GP, 56 Pts

Tomas Kaberle in his first three NHL seasons
98/99: 57 GP, 22 Pts
99/00: 82 GP, 40 Pts
00/01: 82 GP, 45 Pts

Niklas Hjalmarsson in his first three NHL seasons
07/08: 13 GP, 1 Pt
08/09: 21 GP, 4 Pts
09/10: 77 GP, 17 Pts


Can this absurdity stop? What the **** is wrong with you people?
Yeah, and in what universe is a players skill a refection on how many points they put up?

Besides I didnt make the damn comparison Scotty fricking Bowman did. Do you not respect Scotty Bowmans assessment of Hammer? I do and I actually agree with it. I think the Lidstrom comparison is a little off but the Salming is dead on.

Hawksfan2828 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 01:56 PM
  #59
Hawksfan2828
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 7,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by embracedbias View Post
Not that it matters, but here's what Bowman actually said:



Link

I can't find anything about Salming.

Goes to show how willing some people are to stretch the truth in order to fit their inane little arguments.

Bowman has made the comparison several times.

Hawksfan2828 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 01:56 PM
  #60
embracedbias
Registered User
 
embracedbias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Waterloo
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawksfan2828 View Post
Yeah, and in what universe is a players skill a refection on how many points they put up?

Besides I didnt make the damn comparison Scotty fricking Bowman did. Do you not respect Scotty Bowmans assessment of Hammer? I do and I actually agree with it. I think the Lidstrom comparison is a little off but the Salming is dead on.
What? A players offensive skill is reflected in their production. If a player has offensive skill, they will produce points. If someone has offensive skill that does NOT result in goals, why the hell are you calling it offensive skill?

You've got it backwards, you see. The amount of points that a player puts up is a reflection on said player's skill... not the other way around. If a player is skilled offensively, he will put up points. This isn't rocket science.



Could you provide a link to such a comparison? I sure the hell can't find it anywhere. All I can find is Bowman saying that Hjalmarsson "reminds him" of Lidstrom.

embracedbias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:00 PM
  #61
embracedbias
Registered User
 
embracedbias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Waterloo
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawksfan2828 View Post
Bowman has made the comparison several times.
Surely it wouldn't be difficult to find a direct quote, then.

embracedbias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:01 PM
  #62
Hawksfan2828
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 7,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by embracedbias View Post
What? A players offensive skill is reflected in their production. If a player has offensive skill, they will produce points. If someone has offensive skill that does NOT result in goals, why the hell are you calling it offensive skill?

You've got it backwards, you see. The amount of points that a player puts up is a reflection on said player's skill... not the other way around. If a player is skilled offensively, he will put up points. This isn't rocket science.



Could you provide a link to such a comparison? I sure the hell can't find it anywhere. All I can find is Bowman saying that Hjalmarsson "reminds him" of Lidstrom.


Dude you're so off base. Using your logic a stay at home shutdown defensemen isn't valuable at all because he doesnt contribute offensively?

Its pretty astounding that the only aspect of the game people value, respect and base their opinions on is offensive production.

Hawksfan2828 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:04 PM
  #63
Hawksfan2828
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 7,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by embracedbias View Post
Surely it wouldn't be difficult to find a direct quote, then.
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=Scott...9221fd518a9a45

^ there are several articles in that google search you can pick from.

Hawksfan2828 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:11 PM
  #64
embracedbias
Registered User
 
embracedbias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Waterloo
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawksfan2828 View Post


Dude you're so off base. Using your logic a stay at home shutdown defensemen isn't valuable at all because he doesnt contribute offensively?

Its pretty astounding that the only aspect of the game people value, respect and base their opinions on is offensive production.
What? Where did I say that?

Notice that I said "offensive skill" throughout that post.

You are comparing Hjalmarsson with 3 very offensively skilled defensemen. You think that he will become a Norris candidate, and that he is currently better than Kaberle (who has been a top-pairing defenseman in the NHL for 10 seasons, or so). In order to even begin to justify such opinion, Hjalmarsson would need to have some serious offensive abilities.

The problem is that, quite frankly, he doesn't.

If you think that a defensive d-man who has never even played a full season of legitimate top 4 minutes (i.e., 20+ minutes... Hjalmarsson was sitting at ~19 this season) is more valuable than a top-pairing d-man who is capable of putting up 60+ points, then there really isn't much else to talk about. That is truly absurd stuff.

embracedbias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:26 PM
  #65
Hawksfan2828
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 7,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by embracedbias View Post
What? Where did I say that?

Notice that I said "offensive skill" throughout that post.

You are comparing Hjalmarsson with 3 very offensively skilled defensemen. You think that he will become a Norris candidate, and that he is currently better than Kaberle (who has been a top-pairing defenseman in the NHL for 10 seasons, or so). In order to even begin to justify such opinion, Hjalmarsson would need to have some serious offensive abilities.

The problem is that, quite frankly, he doesn't.

If you think that a defensive d-man who has never even played a full season of legitimate top 4 minutes (i.e., 20+ minutes... Hjalmarsson was sitting at ~19 this season) is more valuable than a top-pairing d-man who is capable of putting up 60+ points, then there really isn't much else to talk about. That is truly absurd stuff.
Yeah, and a year ago if I said Keith was going to put up 70 points I would be labeled as a nut.

My point is there is no proof that Hammer cant contribute offensively. Hammer hasn't been used in an offensive role and neither was Keith up until the last couple of seasons.

IMO, Hammer is quite capable of generating offense, hes offensive minded but I think he would rather play d then score goals. By his style of play you can clearly see hes into what he does and thats play D.

Hammer will be one hell of a hockey player for a long time no doubt about that. Anyone who appreciates the sport cant say nay on that one.

Hawksfan2828 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:31 PM
  #66
embracedbias
Registered User
 
embracedbias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Waterloo
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawksfan2828 View Post
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=Scott...9221fd518a9a45

^ there are several articles in that google search you can pick from.
Alright, let's go through them.

The first one is the one that I already quoted. That's where it said that Hjalmarsson "reminded" Bowman of Lidstrom.

The second one is from the same blog, and it says the following:

Quote:
Hjalmarsson didn’t have a point in the game, but he did rack up four blocked shots in the contest to bolster his 2nd on the team total for the season. He has quickly emerged this season as an extremely valuable second-line D-man, and the Hawks’ defense is better because of it.

Maybe Scotty Bowman wasn’t crazy when he said that Hjalmarsson had the potential to be as good as fellow Swede Nicklas Lidstrom.
As you can see, it alludes to something that Bowman said, but it isn't a direct quote (and remember, this is from a blog.. not a newspaper).


The third one is from a newspaper interview with Bowman and the only mention of Hjalmarsson is the following:

Quote:
(Defenseman Niklas) Hjalmarsson has come in and done a great job. When you really think about it, you've got probably 80-85 percent of the players returning.
So, nothing there.


The fourth one is from the "fourthperiod" and it contains the following quote:

Quote:
Scotty Bowman has used the name Niklas Lindstrom when talking about Hjalmarsson this year, high praise for the 22-year-old Swede.
Again, ambiguous... and likely referring to the "Hjalmarsson reminds me of Lidstrom" quote. So, nothing there.


The fifth one was from the Chicago Tribune, and it had nothing about Lidstrom or Bowman.

The sixth is an article the "bleacher report", and it contains the following quote:

Quote:
Hjalmarsson has drawn comparisons to Nicklas Lidstrom from Scotty Bowman himself this season, and has become an emerging star on defense.
Again, there is no direct quote here. All we have is the same "comparison to Lidstrom" that we saw in the other blog.


Do you see a trend here? All we have is the original quote from Bowman that Hjalmarsson "reminds" him of Lidstrom. The rest is a bunch of bloggers getting all excited and wet in the pants.

embracedbias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:41 PM
  #67
embracedbias
Registered User
 
embracedbias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Waterloo
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawksfan2828 View Post
Yeah, and a year ago if I said Keith was going to put up 70 points I would be labeled as a nut.

My point is there is no proof that Hammer cant contribute offensively. Hammer hasn't been used in an offensive role and neither was Keith up until the last couple of seasons.

IMO, Hammer is quite capable of generating offense, hes offensive minded but I think he would rather play d then score goals. By his style of play you can clearly see hes into what he does and thats play D.

Hammer will be one hell of a hockey player for a long time no doubt about that. Anyone who appreciates the sport cant say nay on that one.
So since Duncan Keith was able to go from 44 points to 69 points, Hjalmarsson will be able to go from 17 points to 60+?

Couldn't you use that argument for ANY player? I think Kulemin will be the next Datsyuk. If I would have said that Datsyuk would be a 90+ point player in 2001, people would have called me crazy. Ergo, Kulemin will be as good as Datsyuk.

Make sense? (didn't think so)


There is no proof that Hjalmarsson CAN'T contribute offensively? What the hell kind of argument is that? There is no proof that I can't contribute offensively in the NHL either. Ergo, I will be a top offensive player in the NHL.

When you make a claim about a player, you have to justify the claim. It isn't enough to just say that the claim hasn't been proven false. What the **** man?


When did playing good defensively and good offensively become mutually exclusive? Did Keith get worse defensively now that he's a 60+ point defensman? I don't get it. When the puck is in the offensive zone, is Hjalmarsson sitting at center ice?

embracedbias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:43 PM
  #68
embracedbias
Registered User
 
embracedbias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Waterloo
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,917
vCash: 500
Oh and I'm waiting for the quote about Salming and Hjalmarsson. I haven't found anything even close to that. Did you just make it up?

I guess we'll have to wait until you're proven false for that one too, eh?

P.S. - Brian Burke said that Kulemin will be the next Datsyuk. Prove me wrong!!

embracedbias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:43 PM
  #69
bobermay
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Barrie/UofGuelph
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,924
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfried View Post
No we don't. Look at our cap situation. If Finger goes to the minors, Kulemin signs for $2.25, we spend $750k on each of a 4th line left wing, John Mitchell, 13th forward and 7th defenceman, we have a total of about $6.5 million to get a top line left winger, 2nd line right winger, and 3rd line centre.
This can be argued.

Personally, I think Kaberle and Grabovski could/should be on their way out.

Waive Jeff Finger...

Trade John Mitchell, Mikhail Stefanovich and Phil Oreskovic for Dustin Byfuglien and Brent Sopel...

That would give us a possible D and goaltender core of:

Phaneuf(6.5)-Beachemin(3.8)
Gunnarsson(0.8[0.170])-Komisarek(4.5)
Aulie(0.733[0.175])-Schenn(2.975[2.1])
Sopel(2.333)

Giguere[6]
Gustavson[1.35]

Plus Tucker buyout (1mil)

Payroll: 29.991 mil
Bonuses: 2.445
Cap Hit: 27.546

This means we have 29.254 mil on 14 players
______-Bozak(3.75[2.85])-Byfuglien(3)
Kulemin(2.5)-Kadri(1.75[0.85])-Kessel(5.4)
Stalberg(0.8[0.065])-______-Armstrong(2.75)
Sjostrom(0.75)-Hanson(0.9)-Orr(1)
Rosehill(0.513), _______

Payroll: 23.135
Bonuses: 3.765
Cap Hit: 19.375


Putting this 20 person roster in capgeek:
ROSTER SIZE 20
SALARY CAP $56,800,000
PAYROLL $53,128,833
BONUSES $6,210,000
CAP SPACE $7,931,167

So, we have 8 mil for 1 first line winger, a 3rd line centerman and an extra player. Thats doable.
~6 mil for the 1st line winger
~1.25 mil for the 3rd line centerman
~700K for the extra player

bobermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:46 PM
  #70
Hawksfan2828
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 7,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by embracedbias View Post
Alright, let's go through them.

The first one is the one that I already quoted. That's where it said that Hjalmarsson "reminded" Bowman of Lidstrom.

The second one is from the same blog, and it says the following:



As you can see, it alludes to something that Bowman said, but it isn't a direct quote (and remember, this is from a blog.. not a newspaper).


The third one is from a newspaper interview with Bowman and the only mention of Hjalmarsson is the following:



So, nothing there.


The fourth one is from the "fourthperiod" and it contains the following quote:



Again, ambiguous... and likely referring to the "Hjalmarsson reminds me of Lidstrom" quote. So, nothing there.


The fifth one was from the Chicago Tribune, and it had nothing about Lidstrom or Bowman.

The sixth is an article the "bleacher report", and it contains the following quote:



Again, there is no direct quote here. All we have is the same "comparison to Lidstrom" that we saw in the other blog.


Do you see a trend here? All we have is the original quote from Bowman that Hjalmarsson "reminds" him of Lidstrom. The rest is a bunch of bloggers getting all excited and wet in the pants.
Right then why did Bowman even mention Hammer and Lidstrom then???

You know exactly what Bowman was implying, if he wasn't making the implication then why even say what he said in the first place if that wasn't his intent. Its not like Bowman has a history of saying off the wall things and to be honest the guy is pretty conservative with his language.. He says what he means and means what he says and alludes to nothing.

I can see the Salming comparison easily.

I think what Bowman is saying is Hammer is going to be the next elite Swedish D-men.

Its not only bloggers making the comparison, commentators have been doing it as well. Hell, Keith Jones made the comparison, Pat Foley did as well as numerous others.

I think the point is a lot of people in the hockey world believe the kids going to be a star D-man.

Hawksfan2828 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:51 PM
  #71
bobermay
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Barrie/UofGuelph
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,924
vCash: 500
Gunnarsson has as great as a chance of being the next great Swede, just as much as Hajlmarrsson... just saying...

Both of them have #2 defencman potential, but neither will be superstars IMHO.

bobermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:54 PM
  #72
glucker
Registered User
 
glucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: London, ON
Posts: 4,808
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawksfan2828 View Post
Right then why did Bowman even mention Hammer and Lidstrom then???

You know exactly what Bowman was implying, if he wasn't making the implication then why even say what he said in the first place if that wasn't his intent. Its not like Bowman has a history of saying off the wall things and to be honest the guy is pretty conservative with his language.. He says what he means and means what he says and alludes to nothing.

I can see the Salming comparison easily.

I think what Bowman is saying is Hammer is going to be the next elite Swedish D-men.

Its not only bloggers making the comparison, commentators have been doing it as well. Hell, Keith Jones made the comparison, Pat Foley did as well as numerous others.

I think the point is a lot of people in the hockey world believe the kids going to be a star D-man.
Stralman drew comparisons to Lidstrom... therefore Hammer=Stralman?

Also, Schenn=Weber+Stevens+Foote combined
awesome.

glucker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:54 PM
  #73
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobermay View Post
This can be argued.

Personally, I think Kaberle and Grabovski could/should be on their way out.

Waive Jeff Finger...

Trade John Mitchell, Mikhail Stefanovich and Phil Oreskovic for Dustin Byfuglien and Brent Sopel...

That would give us a possible D and goaltender core of:

Phaneuf(6.5)-Beachemin(3.8)
Gunnarsson(0.8[0.170])-Komisarek(4.5)
Aulie(0.733[0.175])-Schenn(2.975[2.1])
Sopel(2.333)

Giguere[6]
Gustavson[1.35]

Plus Tucker buyout (1mil)

Payroll: 29.991 mil
Bonuses: 2.445
Cap Hit: 27.546

This means we have 29.254 mil on 14 players
______-Bozak(3.75[2.85])-Byfuglien(3)
Kulemin(2.5)-Kadri(1.75[0.85])-Kessel(5.4)
Stalberg(0.8[0.065])-______-Armstrong(2.75)
Sjostrom(0.75)-Hanson(0.9)-Orr(1)
Rosehill(0.513), _______

Payroll: 23.135
Bonuses: 3.765
Cap Hit: 19.375


Putting this 20 person roster in capgeek:
ROSTER SIZE 20
SALARY CAP $56,800,000
PAYROLL $53,128,833
BONUSES $6,210,000
CAP SPACE $7,931,167

So, we have 8 mil for 1 first line winger, a 3rd line centerman and an extra player. Thats doable.
~6 mil for the 1st line winger
~1.25 mil for the 3rd line centerman
~700K for the extra player
Great Plan!!

Move Kaberle and bring Aulie onto the blueline. That's 3 players completely incapable of moving the puck! Further, go on to destroy all of our talent at centre by slotting in a rookie with 1 game experience as our #2 centre, and a sophmore with a half season experience. In keeping with the theme of bad ideas, a 3rd line player with little natural offensive talent on the top line (infront of a blueline that can't move the puck). Meanwhile, leave ZERO for a natural offensive talent as we have to account for bonuses.

seanlinden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 03:05 PM
  #74
Tim Murray
HoF Turd Shiner
 
Tim Murray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 4,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13goleafsgo13 View Post
dont worry we have our people, and if we don't we can get one for cheaper
How boring would hockey talk be without Leaf fans?

Tim Murray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 03:07 PM
  #75
embracedbias
Registered User
 
embracedbias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Waterloo
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawksfan2828 View Post
Right then why did Bowman even mention Hammer and Lidstrom then???

You know exactly what Bowman was implying, if he wasn't making the implication then why even say what he said in the first place if that wasn't his intent. Its not like Bowman has a history of saying off the wall things and to be honest the guy is pretty conservative with his language.. He says what he means and means what he says and alludes to nothing.

I can see the Salming comparison easily.

I think what Bowman is saying is Hammer is going to be the next elite Swedish D-men.

Its not only bloggers making the comparison, commentators have been doing it as well. Hell, Keith Jones made the comparison, Pat Foley did as well as numerous others.

I think the point is a lot of people in the hockey world believe the kids going to be a star D-man.
Wait, what?

Which one is it. Is Bowman trying to imply something, or is he "saying what he means" and "alluding to nothing"?

He said it because he was complimenting a young player on his team. People make similar statements all the time. It's a pretty standard way of complimenting a player. As someone else mentioned, Stralman was compared to Lidstrom as well.

I think Bowman meant exactly what he said. Hjalmarsson has certain qualities to his game that remind him of Lidstrom. His positional play and calmness in the defensive zone, for example.

You've made the mistake of confabulating Bowman's very conservative statement into some grand idea of Hjalmarsson becoming, not just an elite defenseman, but one of the best defensemen of all time (like Lidstrom and Salming).

Saying that Hjalmarsson will be anywhere near that caliber (or even near Norris caliber) is a serious leap of faith. I mean, he's played but 1 season as a top 4 defenseman.

embracedbias 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 06:50 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.