WildCard Posted January 7, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I suppose we can hope he pulls a Mike Richards for us... I just think his contract is so exorbitant for a 3rd line player heading into the downside of his career that I wouldn't want to give up assets to acquire it. We pretty clearly need better depth scoring, but this is the wrong target IMO. Fair enough. But, what do you think it would require to get him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thwomp! Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 But all of our other promising young players haven't hit walls. I don't count Ennis, and Kane has had injuries and is at least scoring He is??? Or do you mean off the ice? :ph34r: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Fair enough. But, what do you think it would require to get him? Honestly no clue. Top-4 D or top-6 forward? Maybe they like Bogosian a lot... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I feel like I've seen flashes of late from the Latvian Locomotive - intermittent, but I've seen them. I think he's getting acclimated. I'm just not sure where he belongs - on 15's wing or center a third line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I feel like I've seen flashes of late from the Latvian Locomotive - intermittent, but I've seen them. I think he's getting acclimated. I'm just not sure where he belongs - on 15's wing or center a third line. Someone else pointed it out, this may be the most complex system he's had to play at a high level. I admittedly don't know much about the USHL, but after that he had a year of Rolston/Cassidy in the AHL, a couple months of Rolston in the NHL, and the rest has been Nolan in the NHL and Latvia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 7, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Honestly no clue. Top-4 D or top-6 forward? Maybe they like Bogosian a lot... I think you can get him for cheaper than that, mostly because of his contract. How complex can a hockey system really get by the way? It's not exactly the NFL playbook or pre-snap reads Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I think you can get him for cheaper than that, mostly because of his contract. How complex can a hockey system really get by the way? It's not exactly the NFL playbook or pre-snap reads Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 7, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I've seen that clip before, and as awesome as it is, it still doesn't convince me. Looks complicated for me, but I haven't been learning to play hockey my entire life. We gave Rex so much for that team even though his system is undoubtedly more confusing and difficult, yet here we are giving Zemgus slack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 I've seen that clip before, and as awesome as it is, it still doesn't convince me. Looks complicated for me, but I haven't been learning to play hockey my entire life. We gave Rex so much ###### for that team even though his system is undoubtedly more confusing and difficult, yet here we are giving Zemgus slack Consider this team is coming from Ted Nolan's "system". Most hockey pundits don't believe Nolan even has a system other than outwork the guy lined up across from you. I would imagine some of the more "mentally challenged" players on this team would struggle with picking up a modern hockey system for the first time in their lives. I've played competitive hockey through high school, college, and a year of pro.. albeit back in the mid 90's. Modern hockey systems are much complex these days, but even back then there were always a few guys on the team that just didn't get it. Talented guys who are accustomed to just going out and playing, now have to play a positional team game. At the pro level the game is too fast to think, you just react, and it looks like some of these guys just aren't reacting the way the system is asking them to. Again, I'm not worried about it... it takes time (more time for some) with a new coach, a new modern system, and young players still learning how to play the pro game who are adjusting to pro-level coaching for the first time in their lives. That, or Zemgus is just done with it and wants out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 My issue with Jordan Staal is he comes with Jordan Staal's contract :P Totally agree. No thanks. I feel like I've seen flashes of late from the Latvian Locomotive - intermittent, but I've seen them. I think he's getting acclimated. I'm just not sure where he belongs - on 15's wing or center a third line. Me too. Until the Panthers debacle, I really liked the Zemgus-Eichel combo. Consider this team is coming from Ted Nolan's "system". Most hockey pundits don't believe Nolan even has a system other than outwork the guy lined up across from you. I would imagine some of the more "mentally challenged" players on this team would struggle with picking up a modern hockey system for the first time in their lives. I've played competitive hockey through high school, college, and a year of pro.. albeit back in the mid 90's. Modern hockey systems are much complex these days, but even back then there were always a few guys on the team that just didn't get it. Talented guys who are accustomed to just going out and playing, now have to play a positional team game. At the pro level the game is too fast to think, you just react, and it looks like some of these guys just aren't reacting the way the system is asking them to. Again, I'm not worried about it... it takes time (more time for some) with a new coach, a new modern system, and young players still learning how to play the pro game who are adjusting to pro-level coaching for the first time in their lives. That, or Zemgus is just done with it and wants out. Good post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted January 8, 2016 Report Share Posted January 8, 2016 (edited) I was very interested in Staal until we went out and got a better version in ROR. I think people are in need of something to jumpstart their excitement right now and are grasping at any high-profile name that comes up. Our needs are puck moving LD and scoring RW. Anyone of any significance we acquire has to fit the 25-and-under core. Our trade chips aren't blue and Kane and Bogosian are not on the market. I wouldn't be surprised to see a vet or a prospect Murray isn't particularly high on moved for a prospect Murray likes that we may know very little about. I'm not seeing potential here for much else. Edited January 8, 2016 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted January 8, 2016 Report Share Posted January 8, 2016 I was very interested in Staal until we went out and got a better version in ROR. I think people are in need of something to jumpstart their excitement right now and are grasping at any high-profile name that comes up. Our needs are puck moving LD and scoring RW. Anyone of any significance we acquire has to fit the 25-and-under core. Our trade chips aren't blue and Kane and Bogosian are not on the market. I wouldn't be surprised to see a vet or a prospect Murray isn't particularly high on moved for a prospect Murray likes that we may know very little about. I'm not seeing potential here for much else. So does this scream Yandle and our 1st in 2016 (RW), and nothing really until then by Murray in terms of addressing our needs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted January 10, 2016 Report Share Posted January 10, 2016 Girgensons is not good at getting the puck out of the zone. So many turnovers on the boards within 10 feet of the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted January 11, 2016 Report Share Posted January 11, 2016 Girgensons is not good at getting the puck out of the zone. So many turnovers on the boards within 10 feet of the point. Last year he was our best player along the boards. Not sure what's happened. You can't blame coaching for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.