PerreaultForever

but I'm NOT saying that. You're making up an argument against a position I never took. My position, which I've stated repeatedly is a BALANCED team is what wins. If you have a lightweight skilled team that totally lacks physicality you can get pushed around and eliminated easily (eg. the Leafs). You need a BALANCED team so that you can push back if and when you run into opposition that tries to intimidate you. If not, you're the Red Army against the Broad Street Bullies and you're going home a loser. Again, I'm not equating that, you are. Usually D men are more one thing over another but if you can get a complete player that can do it all well obviously sign him up. The argument was that Pilut doesn't add anything we don't already have and if we are going to improve the D, we need guys who are better in front of the net, better battlers if you like, but that generally comes with bigger more physical bodies. I think you can go too far in any direction, but to be really good you need a deep team that can adapt to the game thrown at them. I personally believe Jack is at his best when he's more physical and he does have a little snarl in him and he's not a little guy. But for him to be able to be mean and throw his own weight around (like a guy like Ovi does for example) you need other guys on the roster who will allow him to not have to be the one to drop his gloves on those occasions when the other side pushes back. Kucherov's actually a pretty nasty guy and the fact that we did nothing to him in Sweden was the beginning of our season's end. Those Columbus games by the way were really close and if that long OT goes the other way Tampa might not have come through that series again. A lot of these things can flip on a dime. The tough guys did their part and they helped keep their opponents honest and the talent prevailed. One dimensional hockey never wins.

If you want Cozens to learn bad habits and useless play. I'd much prefer Cozens either play with high end talent or on a checking line first where he learns to play 2 way hockey completely as he adjusts. Slow and steady development. Not in between a slacker and a giraffe.

You aren't going to stay so locked in your belief system that you simply refuse to see what was obvious are you? You can scoff at Bogo all you want to, it's an easy target, but you know full well Tampa got over the top by shifting their team towards less skill and more toughness. Everybody, and I mean everybody and every so called expert has pointed this out. It's damn obvious. You said the same sort of things when St. Louis won, with their toughness. and you probably said it about Washington before that but I don't remember. Balanced teams, teams that CAN play tough when needed AND be skilled, those are the cup winners. Few exceptions. probably only Pittsburgh with Crosby at his best, but they too got ousted numerous times by lesser/tougher teams like Philly and Boston. I won't disagree on Borgen though. I am hopeful he will sooner than later be good enough to be part of one of those pairings. and maybe Samuelsson too.

Control the front of the net better and let the goalies see the puck.

It makes sense with the border closure and it gives them the opportunity for a nice experiment. A lot of Canadians like the idea of a Canadian division (and vice versa for the American tv deal). I can see this working, even if it does make losing the Buffalo Toronto thing kind of weird.

Right which is why Tampa won the cup 2 years ago rather than this year where they dressed 7 D men, played Maroon, etc. and often outhit their opponents. Right, it's a dead style.

I remember that. little Brian Campbell knocked out Umberger once too. Everybody can do it once in a while, and little guys can knock out big guys but in no way do I consider McCabe a consistent tough guy. He's a very average sometimes inconsistent D man. Not a bad guy to have at the right price, but nothing special either. Bottom line, our D is not tough and is not tough to play against. There is some potential there, but we do not get better adding Pilut over the current 6. I stand by that.

idk a thing about Irwin but of those I only consider Risto as physical. Dahlin we shall see.

It kind of is, but you need that. You need a balanced roster to win. You look at the way Boston paired Chara with McAvoy and Carlo with Krug. That's the kind of thing you want. Too much puck moving and not enough defense and you lose in the playoffs, like the Leafs.

the bolded is what we are lacking. We already have better or just as good puck moving D men. We need more of those guys for them to pair with. I think the Housley/JBot idea of having all these attacking D men was folly. If we added any D man to this roster I'd want it to be a big stay at home type.

I'd like to swap Mitts out for someone with grit. We are still pretty lacking in the toughness department.

I"ve had him in the back of my mind as a dark horse for next year. I simply think the competition should be open and the best players in camp make the roster and you go from there. If he's good enough, why not play him? The more newness this roster can have the better. Don't want to get stuck in old ways. As for Pilut, I truly do not understand why so many love that guy. I thought he was awful and couldn't care less that he's gone.

I'm not really interested in moving Miller like you are, but I'd be fine to move Montour. Thing is I don't think there is a market or we might have already seen him moved. I'm also not concerned about Mitts. I'm content to just let that go as a blown draft pick and if he surprises great, but if not meh, whatever, it's the past. Just let him play in Rochester and see if he comes around. My expectation is zero so i can't be disappointed. Idk what's going to happen and we have a lot of contracts ended after this season so really who knows what's next???? First I think we find out if they see the RFAs as part of this future or not.

I think so too. Remember when he was drafted a lot of people compared him to Hedmann, and well, we just saw the trophy handed out didn't we.

I don't see Thompson in there but Cozens in time might be part of the 2nd unit. There are simply too many options for me to speculate but I think we can have 2 decent units now and 1 very good top unit. Hopefully we get enough net presence that Risto doesn't have to stand in front and Dahlin can grow into the true quarterback we know he can be. I think what we really need to wait and see on is what the Olofsson and Reinhart contracts end up being and whether or not they'll be seen as part of the plan going forward or not. I am kind of in agreement on this too. I'd like to see one more solid checker/PK guy on the roster. Give us a Boston style 4th line.

When you add an elite player (Hall) you're going to be the most improved. Prior to that I'd have said we have little chance of catching Montreal this year and Ottawa is definitely trending upwards but they have a ways to go. All their youth won't be ready at once. So us and Montreal are most improved. I'm undecided on Florida but I don't actually think the Leafs are better. They might be worse. Depth and bottom end of that lineup is still pretty sketchy. Unless we have an injury meltdown we should make the playoffs. Finally.

shut yer mouth. Leafs can never win a cup. NEVER!

Speculation? I'm not sure he ever had that option.

I'd kind of suggest that. The addition of a big FA like Hall does change everything. You don't give anything up (aside from money obviously) and make yourself better instantly. makes us instantly deeper and better and if Cozens is in fact ready for real NHL minutes we are even better and yes, can consider actual hockey trades of good for different good.

Don't forget Simmonds. They've got 3 Sabres cast offs now. It's hilarious to me that the leafs say they are now "harder to play against" with the addition of 3 ex-Sabres from a team that was considered by most as the very opposite of hard to play against. Perhaps the pendulum has swung and they are on the way down and we are finally on the way up.

idk. i see the third line as Girgensens-Eakins-Okposo. Tage has to earn a spot imo. I don't see him as anything right now.

One of my critiques directed at Reinhart over the years is he doesn't drive the offense. He (and others) always give the puck to Jack, expect him to do all the heavy lifting, and just head to the open areas. Just imagine how good Jack Eichel can be if other teams can't focus solely on him and work at stopping him and have to worry about another guy driving the play into the offensive zone? This pairing imo, will boost Jack's goal totals tremendously. team's are going to have to play Jack more honestly 1 on 1 and that should create a world of new offensive possibilities. More importantly, another playmaker on the PP should lead to big big dividends.

2 more years is the best plan. Anything less is iffy.

If that's the comparable sign him up. If it's over 6 explore trade options.

Hopefully, this time, they learned from their mistake and if he doesn't re-sign by the deadline they move him out for a boatload of future assets.So if he is happy and re-signs we win now and if not we win later. It's a win signing either way. Given the climate before it happened I'd say for me it's most surprising ever.