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

Still Want a First Line Center??

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-27-2011, 10:05 AM
  #26
Puckface NYR*
R.I.P. Boogyman
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Long Island
Posts: 8,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
He's definitely a quality player, but how much can you expect out of him from here on out? I wouldn't want to commit to anything over 4 years, and we both know that's not happening. I'd stretch to 5 if it meant less $$$ per year. Personally, I'd avoid most monsterous contracts unless that player is entering his prime.

Drury's not that much older than Richards; He has about 150 games on him. We'll be investing a lot of money towards a player who's ultimately going to start declining in the near future. Unlike Drury, he's productive offensively, so that money is going towards something legitimate, but I feel like we'll be regretting it.

I don't see how we can afford Richards w/o moving most, or all of Drury's contract.
Are you seriously comparing drury to richards?

Puckface NYR* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:08 AM
  #27
Ke11y96
Registered User
 
Ke11y96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
He's definitely a quality player, but how much can you expect out of him from here on out? I wouldn't want to commit to anything over 4 years, and we both know that's not happening. I'd stretch to 5 if it meant less $$$ per year. Personally, I'd avoid most monsterous contracts unless that player is entering his prime.

Drury's not that much older than Richards; He has about 150 games on him. We'll be investing a lot of money towards a player who's ultimately going to start declining in the near future. Unlike Drury, he's productive offensively, so that money is going towards something legitimate, but I feel like we'll be regretting it.

I don't see how we can afford Richards w/o moving most, or all of Drury's contract.
I understand your comparison but Richards is more capable of being viewed as say a less goal scoring Joe Sakic, or idk but he's a guy that clearly demonstrates that age wont slow him down. Much like Sakic where at 38 was still dominant. Drury has just taken a beating between shot blocking and the grind of that defensive style that he's lost all offensive creativity and skill set.

Richards not known for anything in regards to qualities like Drury. He's not a shot blocker or pker, not physical.. Even at the comparison if they were at the same age currently the wear and tear on Richards compared to Drury wouldn't even be close..

Ke11y96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:09 AM
  #28
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ke11y96 View Post
Believe me I'm not condoning not getting a 1st line center I'm just curious as to everyones take on this youth movement yet bringing in the missing pieces. Stepan to me still will evolve into a #1 center but not for a couple years.

You could be right a move to wing could turn him into a consistent 25-30 goal winger but I dont think thats where Torts would use him..This guy played defense in college he's done well at the center position and to have a center that can help the defense out by being that big body down low and be able to help out from both standpoints from playing center and defense I just think he stays as a center. But to each his own...

I'm not trying to call shots here but since the early last spring I was saying Stepan would make it and he did...The reason I'm counting one of those forwards in is because the NYR's are still pressing on with their youth movement and maybe just a hunch, and yes it is sure safer to say they won't make a roster spot but I believe one of the 3 do...however even if one of them do not how do you fit one of the 3 in next year or the year after?
The common misconception is that the organization has some grandiose plan centered around a youth movement. I know the fans are getting the lip service that theyre committed to youth, but theres 2 problems with that.

1. Sather's ridiculous spending the past few years backed the team so far against the cap, that hes really had no choice but to incorporate cheap players from the farm (injuries have played a roll in this too, this season). I keep seeing "stay the course" around here, but is "the course" a concerted effort by the organization to get younger, or is it Sather being hamstrung by the cap and having no other choice at the moment? Im awfully skeptical.

But lets assume for a moment that Sather has learned from past transgressions, that he sees how hungry this young team is, and how fun they are to watch....well, that brings us to #2 which is a reality that few want to face:

2. one way or another, our youth is going to need talented reinforcements to come in via free agency in order to be truly competitive.

I know we are all excited about the young players, playing their ***** off, and making us proud to be Ranger fans again. But beneath the initial euphoria, it needs to be noted that, besides veterans like Lundqvist and Gaborik, this team is devoid of top end talent. I know the company line is a leap of faith assumption that Stepan can be a #1C, Krieder will become a 40 goal scorer, and everything will be fine. Thats great if it happens, but I think betting on that sets us up for more mediocrity for years to come. The smart money is on our younger players being good - but great?

Enter Brad Richards - hes pretty much tailor made for this team. The right kind of free agent because of what he'll be able to do with Marian Gaborik, the right kind of free agent because of his history with our coach, and especially the right kind of free agent because superior playmaking skills do not age quickly.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:10 AM
  #29
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wraparounds View Post
I'm not advocating either side here, but are some of you serious? 31 years old is not on the decline. Not will a player like Richards be on the decline in 5 years.
Never said he's going to start declining now. Unless he maintains his current play for the length of his contract, I wouldn't consider him. He's going to want a long-term contract. He's not going to look for another pay-day as a 35+ year old. Now is the time for him to cash-in. (2.0)

I see teams seriously outbidding us this offseason. And I can't figure out how we can afford him w/o ridding ourselves of Drury's contract. Let's not forget Redden's cap-hit resurfaces in the off-season too.

Show me how it's possible to re-sign our guys, and fit Richards in. What realistic scenarios can you think of?

Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:12 AM
  #30
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckface NYR View Post
Are you seriously comparing drury to richards?
No.

I'm comparing what happens to a good portion of professional hockey players when they hit their 30's. I won't have too much of an issue with the first few years of Richards potential contract. It'll be the mid-end of the contract that worries me.

Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:13 AM
  #31
Wraparounds
Powerful Wizard
 
Wraparounds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
Never said he's going to start declining now. Unless he maintains his current play for the length of his contract, I wouldn't consider him. He's going to want a long-term contract. He's not going to look for another pay-day as a 35+ year old. Now is the time for him to cash-in. (2.0)

I see teams seriously outbidding us this offseason. And I can't figure out how we can afford him w/o ridding ourselves of Drury's contract. Let's not forget Redden's cap-hit resurfaces in the off-season too.

Show me how it's possible to re-sign our guys, and fit Richards in. What realistic scenarios can you think of?
Like I said, I'm not advocating either way. I doesn't see us fitting him. But I stand by my previous statement.

Wraparounds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:18 AM
  #32
OverTheCap
Registered User
 
OverTheCap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 9,866
vCash: 500
Definitely still want/need a first line center. Not sure what changed in the past few weeks for anyone to think otherwise, it's becoming increasingly clear Gaborik needs an elite center to produce on a consistent basis. Boyle moves to wing, we certainly won't have to gut the team because we have too many centers.

As far as Drury/Richards goes, I've posted this before and I think it bears repeating:

Quote:
Drury has never sniffed a 90 point season, and Richards has already done so twice and is on pace break the 90 point barrier for a third time. Richards averages 71 points a season, and this includes his 48 points in 56 games during 2008-09. Drury was averaging 58 points a season when he signed, and his two 30 goal seasons were the exception and not the rule. Bottom line, Richards is obviously the more talented player of the two and because of that he is likely to perform better than Drury, who was never going to live up to the expectations of the contract that Sather offered him.
Not to mention that playmakers usually have a longer career in this league than players who solely rely on their goalscoring ability.

OverTheCap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:19 AM
  #33
Ke11y96
Registered User
 
Ke11y96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
The common misconception is that the organization has some grandiose plan centered around a youth movement. I know the fans are getting the lip service that theyre committed to youth, but theres 2 problems with that.

1. Sather's ridiculous spending the past few years backed the team so far against the cap, that hes really had no choice but to incorporate cheap players from the farm (injuries have played a roll in this too, this season). I keep seeing "stay the course" around here, but is "the course" a concerted effort by the organization to get younger, or is it Sather being hamstrung by the cap and having no other choice at the moment? Im awfully skeptical.

But lets assume for a moment that Sather has learned from past transgressions, that he sees how hungry this young team is, and how fun they are to watch....well, that brings us to #2 which is a reality that few want to face:

2. one way or another, our youth is going to need talented reinforcements to come in via free agency in order to be truly competitive.

I know we are all excited about the young players, playing their ***** off, and making us proud to be Ranger fans again. But beneath the initial euphoria, it needs to be noted that, besides veterans like Lundqvist and Gaborik, this team is devoid of top end talent. I know the company line is a leap of faith assumption that Stepan can be a #1C, Krieder will become a 40 goal scorer, and everything will be fine. Thats great if it happens, but I think betting on that sets us up for more mediocrity for years to come. The smart money is on our younger players being good - but great?

Enter Brad Richards - hes pretty much tailor made for this team. The right kind of free agent because of what he'll be able to do with Marian Gaborik, the right kind of free agent because of his history with our coach, and especially the right kind of free agent because superior playmaking skills do not age quickly.
I agree with you 1000% I'm just tossing the idea around much like you pointed out that with the possibility of Richards either resigned or signing here we have two essential holes this organization needs to fill. Those of course are a legit #1 center and imo a established stud on the right side defense..Which yes even given our young talent has to come from either free agency or a trade or two.

Richards is exactly what the doctor ordered for the Rangers, I just think it'll get awfully interesting how the rest of the lines configure but like many have said already too much talent is a good problem to have..

Ke11y96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:19 AM
  #34
Riche16
McCready guitar god
 
Riche16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,951
vCash: 500
The problem as I see it with this team is the redundency... you don't have a clear #1 anything except goaltender, right wing and in all liklihood d-man in Staal.

The remaining parts (while giving the illusion of depth) are largely interchangeable. I'm not saying that it's a totally awful thing... but this team lacks top end everything, except the above 3 spots.

It may hurt, but if you want to gain that clear #1 center... you may have to lose one of your young #2a, b, c centers.

I'm not advocating that... just my thoughts

Riche16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:21 AM
  #35
Puckface NYR*
R.I.P. Boogyman
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Long Island
Posts: 8,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
No.

I'm comparing what happens to a good portion of professional hockey players when they hit their 30's. I won't have too much of an issue with the first few years of Richards potential contract. It'll be the mid-end of the contract that worries me.
He may decline towards the end of his contract. But lets say we sign him to a 5 year deal.

Assuming he continues until he is 34 before he starts a decline thats 3 years of 80+ points from a first line center. Then he "declines" and maybe gives us 60-70 points as our second line center. I dont mind paying him until hes 36 for that kind of production.

Drury's best season he scored 69 points. Richards has scored over 70 fives times and is on pace for 90 something this year. Drury declined from 50 to 30's to off the map.

The reason i am sold on richards is because he has proven to fit torts style of play. In getting him we are ASSURED he will mesh with the game plan. I know there may be higher profiled centers that come on the market eventually but I want to go with someone who i know will mold with this teams work ethic and style of play.

The rangers need that one guy to put them over the top and give them a one two punch with gabby. IMO its richards and next season i think this team can contend.

Puckface NYR* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:31 AM
  #36
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckface NYR View Post
He may decline towards the end of his contract. But lets say we sign him to a 5 year deal.

Assuming he continues until he is 34 before he starts a decline thats 3 years of 80+ points from a first line center. Then he "declines" and maybe gives us 60-70 points as our second line center. I dont mind paying him until hes 36 for that kind of production.

Drury's best season he scored 69 points. Richards has scored over 70 fives times and is on pace for 90 something this year. Drury declined from 50 to 30's to off the map.

The reason i am sold on richards is because he has proven to fit torts style of play. In getting him we are ASSURED he will mesh with the game plan. I know there may be higher profiled centers that come on the market eventually but I want to go with someone who i know will mold with this teams work ethic and style of play.

The rangers need that one guy to put them over the top and give them a one two punch with gabby. IMO its richards and next season i think this team can contend.
If it's a 5 year deal, under 7M, I'm all for it. (Assuming we retain all of our RFA's). It'll mean the end of Drury as well. I don't know why he would sign a 5 year deal though. He'll be a 36 year old UFA when his contract is up. I just don't see him signing a 5 year deal.

Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:34 AM
  #37
BroadwayBlues
oxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxo
 
BroadwayBlues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 8,532
vCash: 500
I don't mind signing Richards. The Rangers are at a point where signing the right UFA is the right thing to do.
They've already established a core. Unlike in the pass.
I see Anisimov as a 3rd line center or maybe a move to wing. I think Stepan is better and has more upside.
I'm not quite sure Stepan will be a true center. He needs to work on a couple of things for that to happen. imo
But he will/could be a very good second line one.


Dubinsky--Richards--Gaborik
Kreider--Stepan--Zuccarello
Wolski--Anisimov--Callahan
Prust--Werek--Boyle

BroadwayBlues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:34 AM
  #38
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
No.

I'm comparing what happens to a good portion of professional hockey players when they hit their 30's. I won't have too much of an issue with the first few years of Richards potential contract. It'll be the mid-end of the contract that worries me.
You bring up legitimate concerns for sure. Id imagine some of the capgeeks can find a way to fit Richards under the cap, most likely involving a Drury buyout.

As for Richards declining at the end of his contract? Sure, he will thats inevitable, but as others have noted extraordinary playmakers have traditionally stuck around longer/have been more successful into their mid 30's than power forwards/goal scorers.

And lets face it, in 4/5 years Lundqvist and Gaborik would be approaching their mid 30's and the window for this team would most likely be closing anyway.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:35 AM
  #39
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,957
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
No.

I'm comparing what happens to a good portion of professional hockey players when they hit their 30's. I won't have too much of an issue with the first few years of Richards potential contract. It'll be the mid-end of the contract that worries me.
I agree with this. Along with what potential decimation of our team would have to occur to get Richards.

Unles Drury retires this offseason AND Richards makes it to UFAgency, both of which are rather unlikely, its not in our best interests to pursue him.

__________________
"I have something better than proof: I have anecdotal evidence."
Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:43 AM
  #40
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
I strongly feel Werek will be a mainstay on either the 3rd or 4th line very soon.

One of them is going to have to move to the wing if we acquire a #1 center. Highly doubtful it will be Werek, he's very good on faceoffs, considering the team's struggles in that area.

I'm starting to see less and less where we will be able to fit a very expensive 7+ mil center, financially.

Trading for Weiss could work due to lower financial cost, depending on what the package would be.

Grachev + Valentenko + Horak + Christensen

Something like that, maybe. Three good prospects and a useful roster player. Don't know if something like that gets it done, or if he's even available.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 10:57 AM
  #41
Ollie Queen
After 5 years...
 
Ollie Queen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 10,123
vCash: 500
Boyle has shown that he's more than a 4th line center, sure, but he's really an ideal 4th line C. Anisimov has always been projected to be a third line C with slightly higher potential. Both can get PP and PK time. Look at Pittsburgh. Crosby, Malkin, Staal... some would argue that all three are capable of being #1 centers. Depth, especially down the middle is never a bad thing. Ideally we would just do this:

xxxx - Richards - xxxx
xxxx - Stepan - xxxx
xxxx - Anisimov - Boyle/xxxx
xxxx - Boyle/xxxx - xxxxx

Either Boyle/Anisimov shifts to wing so they can both play on the third line, or Boyle plays on the 4th line with Prust and we roll four lines instead of having a 4th line that only plays 6 minutes a night.

Ollie Queen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 11:10 AM
  #42
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
I strongly feel Werek will be a mainstay on either the 3rd or 4th line very soon.

One of them is going to have to move to the wing if we acquire a #1 center. Highly doubtful it will be Werek, he's very good on faceoffs, considering the team's struggles in that area.

I'm starting to see less and less where we will be able to fit a very expensive 7+ mil center, financially.

Trading for Weiss could work due to lower financial cost, depending on what the package would be.

Grachev + Valentenko + Horak + Christensen

Something like that, maybe. Three good prospects and a useful roster player. Don't know if something like that gets it done, or if he's even available.
Really dont understand where youre going with this. Ethan Werek should be taken into consideration when attempting to acquire a #1 center? Thats ridiculous

And then we should start hemoragging prospects for a guy like Stephen Weiss who is another redundant piece on this team?

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 11:15 AM
  #43
Lion Hound
@JoeTucc26
 
Lion Hound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
I strongly feel Werek will be a mainstay on either the 3rd or 4th line very soon.One of them is going to have to move to the wing if we acquire a #1 center. Highly doubtful it will be Werek, he's very good on faceoffs, considering the team's struggles in that area.

I'm starting to see less and less where we will be able to fit a very expensive 7+ mil center, financially.

Trading for Weiss could work due to lower financial cost, depending on what the package would be.

Grachev + Valentenko + Horak + Christensen

Something like that, maybe. Three good prospects and a useful roster player. Don't know if something like that gets it done, or if he's even available.
I am excited to see him as well. Definately one of my favorite prospects.

Lion Hound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 11:16 AM
  #44
allstar3970
Registered User
 
allstar3970's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
Never said he's going to start declining now. Unless he maintains his current play for the length of his contract, I wouldn't consider him. He's going to want a long-term contract. He's not going to look for another pay-day as a 35+ year old. Now is the time for him to cash-in. (2.0)

I see teams seriously outbidding us this offseason. And I can't figure out how we can afford him w/o ridding ourselves of Drury's contract. Let's not forget Redden's cap-hit resurfaces in the off-season too.

Show me how it's possible to re-sign our guys, and fit Richards in. What realistic scenarios can you think of?
He's not in decline, but its a big risk to assume he won't in the next 2-3 years. If he wants a 7 year deal we're entering dangerous territory. Again.

allstar3970 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 11:18 AM
  #45
Ke11y96
Registered User
 
Ke11y96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zetterqvist24 View Post
Boyle has shown that he's more than a 4th line center, sure, but he's really an ideal 4th line C. Anisimov has always been projected to be a third line C with slightly higher potential. Both can get PP and PK time. Look at Pittsburgh. Crosby, Malkin, Staal... some would argue that all three are capable of being #1 centers. Depth, especially down the middle is never a bad thing. Ideally we would just do this:

xxxx - Richards - xxxx
xxxx - Stepan - xxxx
xxxx - Anisimov - Boyle/xxxx
xxxx - Boyle/xxxx - xxxxx

Either Boyle/Anisimov shifts to wing so they can both play on the third line, or Boyle plays on the 4th line with Prust and we roll four lines instead of having a 4th line that only plays 6 minutes a night.
Its a good point rolling four lines given this teams style of play would definitely keep everyone healthier I would imagine. Now just for playing GM for the day would you or anyone who reads this think to yourself that given the Rangers would have great depth with either Anisimov or Boyle as their 3rd line center one could become expendable for the right price? So for example do you sign Richards then attempt to move say Anisimov + for Brent Burns? Giving us not only our first line center that was needed but also a stud to make our defense a contending defense as well? Burns is mobile, big, fights, a blazzing shot, and would be paired with Staal. One is 6'4 the other 6'5...

Dubinsky - Richards - Gaborik
Wolski - Stepan - MZA
Kreider - Boyle - Callahan
Fedotenko - Newbury - Prust

Staal - Burns
DZ - Girardi
McD - Sauer

Ke11y96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 11:23 AM
  #46
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 32,255
vCash: 500
CAPGEEK.COM CAP CALCULATOR

FORWARDS
Brandon Dubinsky ($4.000m) / Derek Stepan ($0.875m) / Marian Gaborik ($7.500m)
Wojtek Wolski ($3.800m) / Artem Anisimov ($1.800m) / Ryan Callahan ($4.000m)
Sean Avery ($1.937m) / Brian Boyle ($2.000m) / Mats Zuccarello-Aasen ($1.750m)
/ Erik Christensen ($0.925m) / Brandon Prust ($0.800m)
/ Chris Drury ($3.716m) / Derek Boogaard ($1.625m)

DEFENSEMEN
Marc Staal ($3.975m) / Daniel Girardi ($3.325m)
Ryan McDonagh ($1.300m) / Matt Gilroy ($1.500m)
Michael Del Zotto ($1.087m) / Mike Sauer ($1.500m)

GOALTENDERS
Henrik Lundqvist ($6.875m) /Martin Biron ($0.875m)

CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(these totals are compiled without the bonus cushion)
SALARY CAP: $62,400,000; CAP PAYROLL: $55,166,667; BONUSES: $1,487,500
CAP SPACE (21-man roster): $7,233,333

The free agent market was not great last summer in terms of crazy contracts. It's not 2007 and 2008. Kovakchuk had two teams interested in him. Two teams. LA didn't want to pay Kovalchuk more than a $6M cap hit and offered a shorter deal than 15 years. If Richards doesn't want to deal with Toronto and sticks to his 4 team list,Richards is not getting top dollar. LA is frugal. TB can't pay Richards with Vinny and a newly signed Stamkos. If Dallas is out of question if they haven't been sold by late June,that leaves one team.

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 11:25 AM
  #47
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Really dont understand where youre going with this. Ethan Werek should be taken into consideration when attempting to acquire a #1 center? Thats ridiculous

And then we should start hemoragging prospects for a guy like Stephen Weiss who is another redundant piece on this team?
What's not to understand.

Ethan Werek is going to be in the NHL very soon. Possibly as soon as next season.

He's a center.

I CLEARLY wrote, 3rd-4th line.

I was humoring the conversation of the thread by suggesting looking elsewhere then the 7+ million dollar options such as Richards.


Last edited by SupersonicMonkey*: 01-27-2011 at 11:36 AM.
SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 11:26 AM
  #48
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,957
vCash: 500
Yeah my understanding is that our organization thinks Werek is about done developing, and are willing to give him a shot in camp at a bottom 6 role. Even this year, until he got injured.

Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 11:33 AM
  #49
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fitzy Duke of NY View Post
Yeah my understanding is that our organization thinks Werek is about done developing, and are willing to give him a shot in camp at a bottom 6 role. Even this year, until he got injured.
Yes. I agree.

He had a good camp in September, too.

Even more impressive, is that despite the injury, he was able to jump right back into the lineup and proceeded to put up 3 points in his first game back. So he hasn't lost a step.

With no inside information, its clear they'll sign him to an ELC when his CHL season ends. Or soon after. Possibly attempting to get him some AHL games under his belt before the AHL season ends... Assuming the Whale get into the playoffs.

Either way, there will be a spot open for him to earn next season in the bottom six. Boyle and Drury are both capable of playing the wing.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2011, 11:34 AM
  #50
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckface NYR View Post
This team is one player away from being a top contender. That one player is richards.
Not quite. But close. Or perhaps one player and a bit of experience away.

broadwayblue 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 12:57 AM.

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.