dudacek
-
Posts
29,134 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by dudacek
-
-
that would work.
.
I am surprised Thomas isn't already an Oiler or an Islander.
I think he is the only thing standing in the way of Miller being a Blue.
-
Stafford's past two games he was a beast. All kinds off intensity and more confidence than he's shown since Foligno first came up.
God I hope GMTM isn't fooled and moves him to another GM who is.
-
Disagree, especially on the 2nd part. We should be drafting good solid scoring forwards with the 2nd round picks. No reason to draft GT when we have 3 already in the system showing potential. They should do what they did last year and draft a GT in the 4th or later rounds. For isntance Cal Petersen in the 5th round last year is exactly the type of thing to look for. Linus Ullmark was a 6th rounder. Miller was a 5th rounder.
As for trades, if that was an add on (a decent young gt) than fine. If it is a major piece (Miller for Allen and a late pick (3rd or later)) than screw that.
We drafted three scoring forwards, plus Baptiste last year, Grigs and Girgs the year before, and our top two picks this year should be forwards. With 14 picks in the top two rounds over three years, one of them can't be goalie?
You can't draft a guy in the sixth and immediately anoint him as the next one any more than you can say Connor Hurley is going to replace Jason Pominville. It's just as likely that he will be Mike Ryan. It's one thing to get lucky with a Miller, it another to count on it happening.
And yes, Thatcher with the Blues first or Oilers second would make my draft day.
I think you need at least one vet as an option in net. But that's just my bias.
I think you need to give Enroth his chance, but you also need a fallback option because Hackett doesn't seem like he's it.
I'd rather have an Allen-type to come in to compete with him (think Bernier/Reimer) than a Halak, but it's a lot easier to acquire a Halak.
-
My daughter plays volleyball at a high level and is in her "draft year"
While it has been interesting to watch her peers grow and plateau, I can't say I've seen a real rhyme or reason to it tied to their ages.
It seems to be particular to the kid.
I would imagine it is exactly the same in hockey. Age might be a factor, but it's a not a big one when you are talking months.
Deciding who has peaked and who is growing is where the scouts earn their money.
-
No surprise there.
And good, cap-friendly deals.
-
I can't see the Islanders deferring a top five pick, I can see them deferring a top 10.
That gives us a Bennett or Reinhart with our top pick, something like Virtanen or Ritchie or Perlini with their pick.
And then I'd take a flier on ho-Sang in the late first/early second.
There's the injection of offense we need on our prospect list, to go with the gains we've made on defence and character.
If the Isles keep their pick, then we will likely have two balls in next year's McDavid derby.
If I'm Murray, I'm definitely moving some of our seconds to jump up in the draft and/or land a real player.
We already have one of the league's best prospect pools and we have nine picks in the first two rounds over the next two years - and that's without the proceeds of this year's deadline fire sale. And we will have $30 million to play with under the cap next summer.
Darcy failed to deliver a winner, but he sure as hell did a nice job on the teardown.
-
This organization should be looking for a young goalie coming back in at least one of the fire sale trades.
And using one of our many seconds to grab another.
Someone to compete with Enroth and Hackett now and someone to compete with Ullmark and Peterson in the future.
-
It's interesting that there now seems to be a top five developing.
I'm wondering where the Islanders deferral line is. Perhaps at six?
If they do give us the pick this year and it's between five and 10, history shows we will have the ammunition to move up.
-
There is one thing that bothers me about the whole "can't sacrifice the future for a rental" idea.
It's the Stanley Cup. You have a chance to win the damn thing NOW.
What are you waiting for?
Of course it depends on the players involved, but everyone overrates their prospects.
Don't you wish Darcy would have dealt Stafford for another defenceman in 2006?
-
Also, I've heard Murray saying that he's not so interested in acquiring picks.
What NHL-ready players are we likely to get at the trade deadline? Teams that are going to want Miller are going to want to hang onto their useful-to-good players, no?
Absolutely. Teams aren't going to be dumping guys they are going to be leaning on in the playoffs.
So your best bets are first-and second-year pros - players that are on the cusp of making it, who could probably play for buffalo right now.
Up-thread or elsewhere on the board, you'll see names like Jaskin from the Blues and Toffoli from the Kings.
Murray's going to know this group of players very well, so don't be surprised to see players who meet that mould but may be a little farther beneath the radar.
-
I'm an old-school guy who believes a team should have an upper-echelon goalie.
I like Jhonas. Best back-up this team has had since Marty, may even be good enough to be a decent NHL starter on a lockdown team like the Blues.
But he is not the answer for this team long-term.
-
SACK-er-uh is a better player than Seh-CARE-uh ever was.
-
Stafford to the Canucks for Kassian!
-
I'm not really a fan of this idea. If we win the lottery, let's just take the player we have rated no.1 overall and be done with it. What's the point of trading down for an extra 2nd round pick (we already have 3 this year) so that we can settle for a player we have rated lower (or even risk getting not getting the guy we want)?
I'd normally agree with you, but I just don't think there is much to choose from between the top three.
And this is all about baiting Burke into making a Pronger move, or the Oilers desperation to finally get a good d-man.
If we love (for example) Bennett above the other two and aren't sure the other team is picking Ekblad we don't do it.
But we could be in a good position to lever the Oilers and Flames against each other and still get our forward, so why not do it?
-
Damn, Aaron Ekblad looks 25.
Could do a lot worse than a Doug Gilmour clone, if we end up with Bennett.
And Reinhart impresses the hell out of me.
We're looking like picking anywhere in the top three will make the tank worthwhile.
And if we are picking ahead of Edmonton and Calgary, we might be able to parley one team's love of Ekblad into some nice extras.
And if by some freak we end up with Dal Colle, big scoring wing is our biggest weakness.
And he looks like a good one.
-
Seems to me tonight was a look into the crystal ball. That's what we can probably expect from the Sabres next year.
The way Nolan coaches we will have an aggressive push, but we won't have the horses to capitalize on all our chances, and we won't have the experience to avoid breakdowns.
And with Miller gone, average goaltending — like we got tonight — will have us on the bottom end of a lot more 4-3 scores.
Oh wait, that's what I posted on Tuesday.
-
Not sure how many of you have read Lebrun's interview with Murray, or listened to the WGR segment with Lafontaine.
If you have, do you agree there is a definite tone change in terms of the Miller answers?
I'm convinced they have had their chat and Ryan is officially on the market.
And since they have never wavered from the "he can't walk for nothing" position, a deal is going to happen.
It's just a matter of "how soon?" and "for who?"
My impression of Murray is it's not going to take long.
-
You can't be serious?
Fixes our biggest weakness in the best possible way - turns Stafford into a 30-goal scorer, and Foligno into a 20-goal man, fixes the power play, gives Ehrhoff someone who take advantage of his breakouts, lets Ott concentrate on being a shutdown guy, takes the best checkers away from Hodgson, Moulson and Ennis.
We wouldn't be a legitimate contender, but the playoffs aren't far-fetched.
-
Yes, Allen would be the ideal return, but I also don't see that happening.
However, Jaskin's interests me along with either Rattie, Taresenko or Schwartz. And unless this is an expanded deal outside of just moving Miller, I don't see that happening.
I look to Paavarji+Halak+Jaskin. A couple of young wingers and a salary dump, but we may have to add on our end a bit more than we'd like to swallow, not sure though.
As far as your offer goes, we send them someone to fill the hole created by Paajarvi, or they can flip to fill that hole, and it might get done. Pretty realistic on all counts. Jaskin and Paajarvi would probably both play for us next year and that's probably what GMTM would prefer. Blues may prefer to give up a pick.
Crosby could probably make us a playoff team.
He just might.
-
FWIW, I would be asking for Jake Allen, but if I was the Blues, I would say no.
-
I don't believe Jaskin or Rattie are in the conversation unless we add, and most likely a forward prospect, most likely center since they have an abundance of winger prospects.
I'm looking at Paajarvi (22 yrs old, most likely what Murray is looking for development/age wise), Kurker or Carrier (both are 19 and still in their junior system) as the likely 3. Just my opinion is all. All 3 are LW'ers.
I guess it depends on what the Blues think of Miller (is he the missing link to a cup team?)
Rattie and Jaskin are good prospects but we aren't talking Strome or Drouin or Zadorov here.
If there was a draft of all prospects outside the NHL, I doubt either gets a sniff of the first round.
Kurker and Carrier are dime-a-dozen prospects - Daniel Catennaci types who wouldn't dent our top 10.
-
Probably right. I think if we were to trade with St Louis, Rattie is the most likely prospect coming back. Tarasenko is just to good.
Relatively equal prospects, but I would take Jaskin over Rattie. Jaskin is a big kid who can score. Rattie has great hands and hockey sense, but is small and not very fast.
-
What about,
Tarasenko, Halak for Miller (retain salary) Moulson and maybe a pick somewhere?
I would be absolutely stunned if they gave up Tarasenko in a deal for anything other than a building block player.
-
Maybe we give them their second back? McCormick? Tallinder?
It would really depend on what Armstrong thinks they need most - a chance to replace their lost prospect, or a guy that could help them in a cup run this year.
Enroth as a number 1
in The Aud Club
Posted
Enroth signed a very team-friendly two-year deal with the understanding he would get his shot after Miller was gone, and his eyes on a massive payoff as a UFA at the end of next year.If he's automatically backing up a Halak I would expect him to be upset. Given an equal shot with a Halak and failing, he'd have no one to blame but himself.