HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Islanders
Notices

PAP & Pitt? No right?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-07-2011, 02:52 PM
  #51
MTK
Registered User
 
MTK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: West Islip
Country: Iceland
Posts: 2,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by periferal View Post
Please see post #43.

Facepalm at your want. You are suggesting we resign PAP . There are not enough facepalms to put on this post just on that basis.

Great someone likes PAP and you can start a fan club. I hope you didn't get an iron on numbers and name on your PAP jersey cause they are harder to get off.



If you think for one minute, the NYI not resigning PAP is a mistake and makes the team worse then keep smoking it. Lets sign a flawed player that puts up points on one of the worse teams in the NHL. While being on the first line and #1 pp unit. While he gives the puck away constantly. He still does it from game #1 upon other things. We can go a sign another PAP if we need to. There are lots of them .


So my emotions have nothing to do with it. I can just clearly see what type of player he is and he is not a top 6 player on any team. Apparently you think he is going to help this team. Having PAP and Shremp in any capacity on the NYI are just another wasted season. I have no issue if they play in the AHL.

If you can let me know why you think PAP is an NHL player who can play Top 6. Let me know about it because his play on the ice says otherwise. If you are talking about resigning him to play 3rd/4th line. I could maybe agree with that but he has no spot on the checking line.



PS: See Mitchy's post on PAP. Its spot on.

MTK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 03:00 PM
  #52
Groin Of Bates
Registered User
 
Groin Of Bates's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,826
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUNRISE27EMTK View Post
Let me know about it because his play on the ice says otherwise.
But, he can score...


(Though, he brings absolutely nothing to the first line or anything he is a part of and acts solely as a beneficiary of the line)

Groin Of Bates is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 03:04 PM
  #53
mygameworn
Registered User
 
mygameworn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 1,732
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to mygameworn
Quote:
Originally Posted by periferal View Post
What if they traded Parenteau to Phoenix? Would you still carry him to Pittsburgh? Because that would make no sense.
Where did Phoenix come into play? the only speculation is Pitt...

As most analysts say, the only way NYI will get some decent NHL players is through a trade. You cannot build a playoff contender with fringe ahlers and waiver pick ups. Start trading UFAs and late picks for some vet's with at least 2 years left on their contracts and see where that takes you. What's the worst thing that can happen? They finish last?

mygameworn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 03:17 PM
  #54
Mustang2750
Registered User
 
Mustang2750's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,253
vCash: 500
Standard clueless HF Islander fans wanting to get rid of one of our better young players. I am always embarassed reading the stuff Isles fans post on this board

Mustang2750 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 03:28 PM
  #55
mitchy22
Registered User
 
mitchy22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,751
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mustang2750 View Post
Standard clueless HF Islander fans wanting to get rid of one of our better young players. I am always embarassed reading the stuff Isles fans post on this board
You missed the and hit the above it.

All kidding aside, for the PAP supporters, I'd love to have a serious discussion regarding what I mentioned in my post. For the people who liked/agree with what I had to say, expect more long-winded posts from me in the future.

At the end of the day, we have too many flawed forwards. Some of them have to be upgraded.

Who of these three would you choose first?
PAP, Schremp, Comeau

Who of those three would you keep in a 3rd/4th line role?

If I had built this team for this year, I had Bergie and Comeau slotted in on my 4th line. (Obviously, they'd have had the opportunity to play their ways up.) Let them learn how to play a consistent hockey game. At worst, they've got some speed and grit. Useful for 4th liners.

To build a better hockey club, you put the best players at the top and let the lesser players trickle down. You also choose those lesser players that you keep wisely. Forgive me, but PAP isn't a good fit for the future of this team. Either is Schremp as far as I'm concerned. Comeau will probably end up being a complementary forward or a 4th liner in the long run unless he learns to drive to the net and play a consistent, simple, North-South game.

There will be players with similar qualities that we can pick up after we fail at free agency/trading. Until that time, let's hope that we can bring in some higher quality for our top lines.

Call me crazy, but I'd like to see an Islander score 70+ points. In order to do that, you have to have some talented players on lines with our other talented players. It also really helps if the lines have the right mix of intelligence, speed and/or grit (not to mention chemistry...which often comes from putting intelligent players with other intelligent players.)

,
Mitch


Last edited by mitchy22: 02-07-2011 at 03:33 PM. Reason: fixing some brain farts, leaving others
mitchy22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 03:39 PM
  #56
Groin Of Bates
Registered User
 
Groin Of Bates's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,826
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mustang2750 View Post
Standard clueless HF Islander fans wanting to get rid of one of our better young players. I am always embarassed reading the stuff Isles fans post on this board
A team will never win without upgrading prospects into talent. You cannot hold onto everyone and if we sign back everyone, then there will be ZERO progress made.

Parenteau is a beneficiary and would put up roughly the same numbers on about 27/30 NHL teams first line.

Standard clueless HF Islander fans who want to hold onto everyone. (I can do it too)

Groin Of Bates is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 03:39 PM
  #57
OpAck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Raleigh, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBoss22 View Post
On the NYI he plays on the LW.

With the Canucks he played on the LW.

He may be able to play RW, but it appears LW is his natural position.

Assuming he can play RW. What do you think about putting him on the 1st line? Do you think he'll still be able to burn up and down the ice with greater minutes? As we all know his biggest asset is his skating. If he doesn't have the jump, he's not nearly as effective.
Actually no, he played right wing in Vancouver and in Manitoba. I can then only assume that he played on the right side with Spokane since he was drafted as a RWer (a guess of course). But with the Canucks, he was usually paired with either Demitra or Raymond, who both played left wing with typically Kesler at center. Only once, can I find an instance where he played left wing and that was with Hansen on the right side and I think Wellwood at center.

I actually can't find evidence the guy played left wing for any extended period of time prior to NYI. In addition...I think he's got the stamina to log top line minutes. He's averaging a little over 13 minutes at this point, while guys like Tavares and Moulson are around 19 mins/game. But you have to also figure JT and Moulson are getting PP time where majority of those PP mins are spent (hopefully) in the opposition's end...where Grabs is not necessarily going to be utilizing his speed.

All I'm saying is the guy's got a history on the right side...might as well see how he looks on the top line...he's surely earned it, IMO.

OpAck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 03:39 PM
  #58
redbull
Expect more
 
redbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchy22 View Post
Call me crazy, but I'd like to see an Islander score 70+ points. In order to do that, you have to have some talented players on lines with your other talented players. It also really helps if the lines have the right mix of intelligence, speed and/or grit (not to mention chemistry...which often comes from putting intelligent players with other intelligent players.)
I don't even see why this is a discussion. You cannot watch Parenteau play and seriously think this guy is one of the core players that needs to be retained!

I would love to see people LIST forward in priority on this team. Even priority for next season, let alone "the elusive future" - but can anyone seriously place Parenteau on any "protected list" for next year?

Tavares, Okposo, Nielsen, Moulson, Bailey - these guys are good players, players to build around.
That's it.

Hunter, Konopka, Gillies - depth/role players.

Comeau, Parenteau, Grabner, Schremp, Martin -- who are the players on this list that you waive? (even if you re-sign them, many will not be waiver-exempt - of course, few would even be picked up)

How can you possibly upgrade the team if you don't upgrade THESE players?

Some here would probably deal Bailey and Comeau to bring in a guy like MacArthur and his 50-60 points.

Remember: even last place teams have leading scorers. That means SQUAT.

Remember: Tavares is a good player, he's by no means a great player - YET. Keep surrounding him with scraps and see how far it gets his development.

redbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 03:44 PM
  #59
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,354
vCash: 500
We have a guy who can score but is flawed. Replace him with someone better and he goes to line 2. Out goes Colliton. Or Gillies.

You add someone better and out goes Schremp or who knows?

Those moves make us better.

You get rid of PAP via back toting to Pittsburg recieving a pick or prospect and we get WORSE.

Now which one makes us a better team and which one is a trademark job description of our current GM's handling of the roster?

And are we better now than we were three years ago?

So PAP stays until he's forced out in an improvement on any other team; PAP gets us yet another third rounder for the next Bailey (or whatever ISS had picked since we have no more Jankowski) to toil in mediocrity on LI.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 03:47 PM
  #60
mitchy22
Registered User
 
mitchy22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,751
vCash: 500
@Redbull - See the last time I ranted about PAP for my list, hehe.

,
Mitch

mitchy22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 03:56 PM
  #61
mitchy22
Registered User
 
mitchy22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,751
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlTimeHockey View Post
We have a guy who can score but is flawed. Replace him with someone better and he goes to line 2. Out goes Colliton. Or Gillies.

You add someone better and out goes Schremp or who knows?

Those moves make us better.

You get rid of PAP via back toting to Pittsburg recieving a pick or prospect and we get WORSE.

Now which one makes us a better team and which one is a trademark job description of our current GM's handling of the roster?

And are we better now than we were three years ago?

So PAP stays until he's forced out in an improvement on any other team; PAP gets us yet another third rounder for the next Bailey (or whatever ISS had picked since we have no more Jankowski) to toil in mediocrity on LI.
I have to disagree. There is definitely a level of return that makes sense to move PAP. Like I mentioned, for a 5th (or similar prospect), I'd just assume we keep him instead of placing more of a burden on Bridgeport. But if we get a 2nd rounder, or a prospect of that nature who is further along in his development (something we should be looking more towards), then I'd be awfully annoyed if we didn't pull the trigger. This is not a core player. This is not a player who plays a smart game that other players can look towards as an example. This is a player who actually makes the players around him...worse. That's not a player who you keep just because he's producing numbers. That's a player who you gladly remove for a better asset, even if it's a future.

This hockey season is lost. If we have to stack two lines of NHLers and live with garbage at the bottom, then so be it. Why not give Martin a shot on the 2nd line? Why not spread the wealth and throw KO back up on JT's right side? Why not give Bailey a shot to be away from Schremp and Comeau? There's plenty of things we can do. Almost all of them to me seem like a better idea than keeping the worst thought-out line in history together. Yes, that's hyperbole, but it's probably not that far off from the truth of the matter.

I fully agree with the concept that you are portraying, Ol'TH. I just think that PAP brings too many negatives to be included in the "stay until someone better replaces him" crowd.

Not to mention, I think I easily replace him with KO and bump other guys up. I'd stick Bailey on that line and not even question the move for a moment. I'd put Comeau there and feel better about it because Comeau can actually skate (even if he'll probably never be more than an inconsistent, complementary player.) Edit - Forgive my redundancy, and pretend it's just reinforcement. Not to mention, look at how similar my post and Redbull's last one are. More reinforcements. (Tangent - Remember reinforcements? Those little circle stickies that keep your busted paper together so it can hold onto the binder. You could look at those things as a solution. Alternatively, one could try to get to the source of the problem which is often a crappy binder, or really cheap paper. Somehow, this seems like an important concept for this thread. Though I'm sure I could have done a better job with the analogy.)

,
Mitch


Last edited by mitchy22: 02-07-2011 at 04:08 PM.
mitchy22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 03:56 PM
  #62
redbull
Expect more
 
redbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlTimeHockey View Post
We have a guy who can score but is flawed. Replace him with someone better and he goes to line 2. Out goes Colliton. Or Gillies.

You add someone better and out goes Schremp or who knows?

Those moves make us better.

You get rid of PAP via back toting to Pittsburg recieving a pick or prospect and we get WORSE.

Now which one makes us a better team and which one is a trademark job description of our current GM's handling of the roster?

And are we better now than we were three years ago?

So PAP stays until he's forced out in an improvement on any other team; PAP gets us yet another third rounder for the next Bailey (or whatever ISS had picked since we have no more Jankowski) to toil in mediocrity on LI.
I agree with your overall approach - but in PAP's specific case, it's ADDITION by SUBTRACTION.

I think removing Parenteau from the lineup, even for a 3rd round pick (essentially, nothing) would not improve the team but would not make us worse.

Frankly, I'd rather Bailey elevated to the first line. I'd rather see Grabner on the top line.

Bailey - Tavares - Okposo
Moulson - Nielsen - Grabner
Martin - Schremp - Comeau

I think eliminating Parenteau means Bailey/Okposo get more minutes, Martin and Grabner see more minutes. Parenteau is a terrible hockey player who's getting points - that's far different than being a good hockey player who's struggling.

Tambellini is/was a bad hockey player on the NYI for two years. Now on VAN he went through a spurt of offensive output but settled in nicely to zero goals in his last 17 games.

We all watched Blake score 40 goals...did anyone cry when he left town? Was he a 40 goal scorer? or a guy who scored 40 goals on a bad team, when all the stars aligned?

Great GMs know the difference. Snow did a smart thing walking away from Yashin, from Blake, (or was it the cheap thing?).

Let's hope he's $$$MART enough (you too Wangman) to know when to hold'em and know when to fold'em.

C'mon Isles, it's about time this team upgrades!

redbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 04:11 PM
  #63
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,354
vCash: 500
I would normally agree with both your sentiments in this case, but THIS jalopy Snow has out there needs ANYTHING it can get to work.

We need defense that hits and protects our goalie at all costs #1. (Poulin is too valuable)

We need scoring to support the forewards and goalie and defense.

We need someone to create opportunities and shield Tavares from full coverage while providing whatever we can to line 2. And thus line 3.

Pap is a defensive NIGHTMARE but in the grand scheme of things, with the MINIMAL effort Snow has made to keep a working roster out there IN THIS INTEGRAL TIME OF DEVELOPMENT we end up needing the shooting turnover or someone who can meet his point totals or come close.

Down the line he can be a serviceable winger on line 2 with Bailey if they can both address their issues.

It sucks, but we can't go even lower talent wise than we are and expect to develop winners. Martin shouldn't be up, and Bailey belongs on line 3 or 4 for his miserable contributions. (PAP has given this team more than the Izzy Redux)

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 04:16 PM
  #64
Seph
Registered User
 
Seph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oregon
Country: South Korea
Posts: 15,336
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Seph
Quote:
Originally Posted by redbull View Post
raise your hand if you think Parenteau can be any better than he has been this year? Would he make another team at all?
I don't think Parenteau is likely to improve and I'm certainly no big fan of his. However, if he wouldn't make another team - and specifically one that has a chance at the playoffs - then he has no trade value whatsoever. So if that's the case, then it makes sense to keep him, since he does make our team.

Seph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 04:19 PM
  #65
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpAck View Post
Now, compared to Grabner...Grabs has a special ability (speed), that has afforded him the opportunity to excel on the 2nd or 3rd line with little to no PP time. Switch the players out, and I think Grabner would add an element to the Tavares line that "might" make a world of difference if they can gel. Meanwhile, I have very little confidence PAP would be effective in a 2nd/3rd line role with little PP time.
I disagree.

I think Tavares and Moulson profit incredibly from Parenteau's puck-control, puck-carrying and even some of his board work.

Also, if any of you think Grabner can do the PP QBing from the hashmarks the way Parenteau does, then you've got a lot to learn about how a powere play runs.

Although playing with confidence, Grabner has not yet shown the adeptness to control the puck at the same level as Parenteau. He still loses a fair share of pucks that are actually sitting right on his blade.

As far as I'm concerned, there's not a guy on the current team who is as subtly nifty with the puck as Parenteau is - not even Tavares at this point, who easily gives away or loses the puck as much as Parenteau does. I'd say Parenteau gives his teammates more prime passes that are ready-and-made-for-shooting than anyone else on the team.

Chapin Landvogt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 04:26 PM
  #66
mitchy22
Registered User
 
mitchy22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,751
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlTimeHockey View Post
Down the line he can be a serviceable winger on line 2 with Bailey if they can both address their issues.

It sucks, but we can't go even lower talent wise than we are and expect to develop winners. Martin shouldn't be up, and Bailey belongs on line 3 or 4 for his miserable contributions. (PAP has given this team more than the Izzy Redux)
Bailey is not going to end up like Brad Isbister. You can mark my words on that one right now. Save this post. Bailey is going to be a significant NHLer at some point for a long time. (Regardless of how we've brought him along.)

In a perfect world, which we clearly do not live in, Martin would be a top-6 forward at Bridgeport. Bailey would be flanked by two legitimate top-6 forwards. PAP would not be on the team.

As far as I can tell, I can immediately remedy one of those if a trade became available. Forgive me, but I don't think taking PAP off of JT's line hurts Tavares' future. I also don't think this team will be brutally hurt by removing PAP from the lineup. I also don't think the team will be that much worse if we need to reach down and grab the dredges of Bridgeport to bump up other players that shouldn't be here to bigger roles. It'll make Bridgeport worse. I'd avoid it if we're not getting anything worthile for PAP in return.

...which would probably be the case - probably making much of this thread a venture into fantasy. Of course, if that is the case, it kind of proves my point about PAP's worth. Why would he be worth so little to others if he's worth so much to us? I'll answer that. It's because he's really not worth that much to us. He's just another misplaced body on our roster.

,
Mitch

mitchy22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 04:29 PM
  #67
mitchy22
Registered User
 
mitchy22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,751
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seph View Post
I don't think Parenteau is likely to improve and I'm certainly no big fan of his. However, if he wouldn't make another team - and specifically one that has a chance at the playoffs - then he has no trade value whatsoever. So if that's the case, then it makes sense to keep him, since he does make our team.
This is truthful and a bit depressing. However, if some other GM is confused, I'd hate to not take advantage of that confusion. It's only fair, we've had others take advantage of our confusion far too often.

,
Mitch

mitchy22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 04:33 PM
  #68
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TennesseeJedd View Post
What did Martin do to warrant being called up, how about Reese or Colliton? Yeah they were really lighting it up. What did Wishart do to get the call up? Wishart didn't " light it up" in the NHL but played smart and composed against Ott.
We'd all prefer they still be in the AHL. I wish we had Bergenheim, an NHL-proven UFA, Streit and Eaton playing instead.

If you've seen either Ullstrom or Figren play, you'd see they are not ready to spend 30 some games up in the bigs. They need the ice time and responsibility they get in the developmental league, where they can mature properly. Particularly Ullstrom needs to be handled well. He has possibilities.

Quote:
What exactly do you think we are competing for down the stretch? Oh no, we cant trade the superstar P.A. because it may cost us...uh.. nothing. I dont think PA is the answer for Tavares' wing and I hope you dont either. If Pit wants him get what you can for him and get a look at some of our guys in the system
Well, for one thing, that line is not only our best line, but the players on it gel and like to play with each other. Just because upgrades aren't coming this season doesn't mean bring up the entire farm team. What happens when those physically immature players break down mentally or physically?

Quote:
How exactly would playing Grabner in P.A.s spot be a bad thing? or giving Martin a shot on the second line? or seeing an Ullstrom or Figren on the 3 or 4 lines?
Well, for one, Martin doesn't carry the puck and make passes like Parenteau does. We need him crashing and banging, not being asked to also try to miraculously be a first line offensive player as well.

For another thing, Grabner is doing just fine with Nielsen and Okposo. Not only is it wise to spread the wealth a bit, but no need to fix what isn't broken. I'm sure the coaching staff sees who plays well together - heck, we're seeing it too.

JT is so young, it's good for him to play with a couple of 27 year olds and not to have a plethora of other young guys looking to make a name for themselve lining up with him every other night.

Quote:
Newsflash, the season is lost so get what you can for who wont be wearing the sweater next year. That means bye bye P.A., see ya' Schremp.
In general, Snow should move guys he doesn't plan on resigning. At this juncture, I see Snow resigning Parenteau. Dunno about Schremp though.

Chapin Landvogt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 04:39 PM
  #69
TheBoss22
Registered User
 
TheBoss22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpAck View Post
Actually no, he played right wing in Vancouver and in Manitoba. I can then only assume that he played on the right side with Spokane since he was drafted as a RWer (a guess of course). But with the Canucks, he was usually paired with either Demitra or Raymond, who both played left wing with typically Kesler at center. Only once, can I find an instance where he played left wing and that was with Hansen on the right side and I think Wellwood at center.

I actually can't find evidence the guy played left wing for any extended period of time prior to NYI. In addition...I think he's got the stamina to log top line minutes. He's averaging a little over 13 minutes at this point, while guys like Tavares and Moulson are around 19 mins/game. But you have to also figure JT and Moulson are getting PP time where majority of those PP mins are spent (hopefully) in the opposition's end...where Grabs is not necessarily going to be utilizing his speed.

All I'm saying is the guy's got a history on the right side...might as well see how he looks on the top line...he's surely earned it, IMO.
Grabner is a peculiar one.

I thought Dmitra was a RW?!?!?!

Regardless, I guess a player like Grabner can play both sides as you can't rely on him to go in the corner to retrieve the puck (wheter LW or RW he'll still suck at it). I really feel if you gave him top line minutes he would not be able to give 100% every shift. Plus this is really his first year playing regularly in the NHL. I think he's slowly getting more minutes on the PP and PK, but let's not start double shifting the guy (not to imply you're recommending it).

In Grabs case I think we are developing him just fine.

TheBoss22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 04:42 PM
  #70
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groin Of Bates View Post
Parenteau is a beneficiary and would put up roughly the same numbers on about 27/30 NHL teams first line.
Parenteau is a beneficiary of his ice time, not just his linemates.

He contributes just as much to them being offensively successful as they to him.

In addition, they seem to read of each other pretty well. It's a certain level of chemistry.

Judging by what I see game-in and game-out, no other winger on this team would gel as well with Moulson and Tavares, puck-holding lover Okposo included.

But believe me, I'd rather see Tavares being surrounded by Gaborik and Hossa. When's that gonna happen, again?

Chapin Landvogt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 04:49 PM
  #71
mitchy22
Registered User
 
mitchy22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,751
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chapin Landvogt View Post
Parenteau is a beneficiary of his ice time, not just his linemates.

He contributes just as much to them being offensively successful as they to him.

In addition, they seem to read of each other pretty well. It's a certain level of chemistry.

Judging by what I see game-in and game-out, no other winger on this team would gel as well with Moulson and Tavares, puck-holding lover Okposo included.

But believe me, I'd rather see Tavares being surrounded by Gaborik and Hossa. When's that gonna happen, again?
I think there's a big gap between PAP and the players listed at the bottom. Plenty of useful players in between that would be better choices than PAP.

I think the first part I bolded needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Forgive me, but I think a lot of players would do more for JT/Moulson than PAP currently does. A LOT of players. Some of them, might even be on this team; we wouldn't know it though because the line has rarely been apart.

I don't really want to try and convince every single poster that it's a bad line. I don't really want to continue to point out the flaws of PAP and the attributes that Moulson/JT have that make it a bad line.

That said, it'd be nice if some people realized that I was correct and how wrong they were when it comes to discussing PAP's usefulness in relation to his linemates. Of course, my case can't be proven because of what I mentioned in the last sentence of my second paragraph. I've tried to prove the other part (PAP's negatives to the line), but some things probably need to be seen to be believed...and we obviously don't all see the same things.

,
Mitch


Last edited by mitchy22: 02-07-2011 at 04:53 PM. Reason: added more shenanigans
mitchy22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 05:01 PM
  #72
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redbull View Post
I agree with your overall approach - but in PAP's specific case, it's ADDITION by SUBTRACTION.
Gotta disagree. Would MUCH rather have him here than Colliton or Schremp. I'd MUCH rather see him playing some role here that would allow Martin and Bailey to be on the farm.

Parenteau and his play are not the problem. He IS more talented and capable with the puck than a number of players on this team. He IS a better playmaker than most everyone on this team.

There are other construction sites here. I've gotta fully agree with OTH on this front.

Want PA off the team, then you've easily got 4 or 5 other guys you gotta want off more. Upgrade, upgrade, upgrade. Until better guys are there, you keep the few who can actually do some good things along the way.

We musn't forget that this has been PA's first real shot at playing regularly at this level. He's done much better than many others we've had. Seriously, he's making every bit the impact this year that Moulson made last year. He's on pace to surpass those 48 points Moulson had last season.

Quote:
Bailey - Tavares - Okposo
Moulson - Nielsen - Grabner
Martin - Schremp - Comeau
Honestly, I thought Okposo and Tavares was a baddddd combination last year. Okposo DOES make a few good passes now and then, but he loves hogging that puck and trying to stickhandle out of cabinets. That's what he does and well, to mixed results thus far. Tavares needs the synergy that a Parenteau has thus far provided him with. Again, an UPGRADE here is fine and will be necessary to win, but Okposo is, sadly, not it. Not now anyhow. Maybe he can work with Nielsen over the long run.

In addition, I wouldn't terribly mind trying Bailey with Tavares, but his play this season indicates to me that as of now, he'd kill that line's current efficiency. He just doesn't seem ready to assume the responsibility that Parenteau gladly assumes.

As mentioned in a post above, Grabner is fine with Nielsen and they seem to understand each other well. Why spoil that? Do folks really think Grabner and Tavares would suddenly be pure magic??? We may find out in the future, but I don't personally see it based on their playing styles to date.

Quote:
Tambellini is/was a bad hockey player on the NYI for two years. Now on VAN he went through a spurt of offensive output but settled in nicely to zero goals in his last 17 games.
I feel Parenteau is a far better player than Tambellini. FAR BETTER.

At this juncture, we have to understand that Grabner basically replaced Tambellini and Parenteau basically replaced Bergenheim.

I'd have liked to keep Bergenheim in order to allow Martin the proper time on the farm (and surely ahead of resigning Sim), but Grabner and Parenteau have been much better for this team than either Tamby or Bergy.

Quote:
Let's hope he's $$$MART enough (you too Wangman) to know when to hold'em and know when to fold'em.

C'mon Isles, it's about time this team upgrades!
Yes, bring us upgrades!

We want real NHLers on the first and second lines and we want PA on the third line instead of the Collitons and Schremps of the world!


Last edited by Chapin Landvogt: 02-07-2011 at 05:24 PM.
Chapin Landvogt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 05:07 PM
  #73
SLAPSHOT723
Moderator
Bandwagon since 2008
 
SLAPSHOT723's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Long Island
Posts: 15,921
vCash: 500
Actually, Grabner replaced Bergenheim and Parenteau replaced Tambellini.

Either way, they are both significant upgrades. I'd rather have Grabner and Parenteau over Bergenheim and Tambellini any day.

SLAPSHOT723 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 05:11 PM
  #74
4Isles4*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brunomics View Post
If PAP get's traded I'll drive him to Pitt myself.
ill pay for your gas

4Isles4* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2011, 05:17 PM
  #75
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchy22 View Post
I think the first part I bolded needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Forgive me, but I think a lot of players would do more for JT/Moulson than PAP currently does. A LOT of players. Some of them, might even be on this team; we wouldn't know it though because the line has rarely been apart.

I don't really want to try and convince every single poster that it's a bad line. I don't really want to continue to point out the flaws of PAP and the attributes that Moulson/JT have that make it a bad line.
Mitch, I know you just don't like the guy. You make good points, and I see where you're coming from, but it's clear to all readers that you're really motivated in taking PAP (and also Comeau) to court - more so than just about any other players.

I think to a degree you do so unfairly. Despite making verifiable points, it just seems like you're often seeing things that many of us aren't or that we'd disagree with you on in your analysis.

But I just don't feel like going into it much now.

What I do think though is that the coaching staff, especially as raw as Capuano is at this level, has talked with the guys (especially the important players) and maybe even tried some things in practice to see who simply fits with whom right now.

For all we know, JT and Moulson simply LIKE playing with Parenteau. And I ask, why not? Do we really think that Bailey, Okposo and Grabner are immediate, super-awesome, gonna help Tavares score 40 goals guys? Is our first line sooooo inefficient, that it's worth taking it apart in order to find out?

It's still our best line and even when it doesn't score, it often keeps opponents busy.

I don't know about you guys, but I didn't see chemistry between Okposo and Tavares last year - and they were force-fed together. Sure, their talent (and Moulson's help) got them a few points along the way, but their general styles and desire to hold the puck (often a wee bit too long in each case) just don't mesh.

Grabner is doing fine where he is and despite his confident play, still has problems keeping his puck-control on par with his speed. That's gonna take a while.

At this point, Bailey is lacking such confidence and efficiency this season, that I'd almost see it as a spit in JT's face to place these two next to each other.

Anyhow, we'll see soon enough what PAP's future holds and whether he remains an Islander and remains on Tavares' line. I'm sure you'll check out my points in the posts above to get a feel for my other points with respect to these guys.

Again, Snow should trade any and all upcoming UFAs/RFAs that he doesn't plan on signing by the trade deadline.

I just don't wanna see guys walking away for nothing if he knows right now that he's not keeping them. This goes first and foremost for Martinek, Parenteau and Konopka.


Last edited by Chapin Landvogt: 02-07-2011 at 05:27 PM.
Chapin Landvogt 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 10:22 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.