WildCard Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 (edited) Kane has value to us. The net difference between adding Fowler and subtracting Kane is a negative for us. For what? For him to play on the 3rd line and protect Girgensons? Or to get arrested? I honestly see no value in him here other than hope and a low cap hit. Not only are we packed at forwards now, but we're still thin on the blue line. Kulikov solves little to nothing for us. Fowler is a need, Kane isn't even a benefit Edited July 2, 2016 by WildCard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 Minus 15 goals. And Fowler is the equivalent of McCabe defensively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 (edited) Minus 15 goals. And Fowler is the equivalent of McCabe defensively. Where are you getting that number? 15? He's not here to play McCabe's role, he's here to play a role that nobody on our team currently can. And he is a better player than McCabe Edited July 2, 2016 by WildCard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 For what? For him to play on the 3rd line and protect Girgensons? Or to get arrested? I honestly see no value in him here other than hope and a low cap hit. Not only are we packed at forwards now, but we're still thin on the blue line. Kulikov solves little to nothing for us. Fowler is a need, Kane isn't even a benefit Saying Kulikov solves "little to nothing", when Murray brought him in to play a top 4 role, when he played big minutes last year as a left shot D, and very well in the playoffs, is completely unfair. He's filling a need. Sure, I'd love Fowler too. But Kulkov makes our team better than it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 Minus 15 goals. And Fowler is the equivalent of McCabe defensively. More McCabe criticism? Where were you people when I was alone on an island saying McCabe was struggling?!?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radar Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 Saying Kulikov solves "little to nothing", when Murray brought him in to play a top 4 role, when he played big minutes last year as a left shot D, and very well in the playoffs, is completely unfair. He's filling a need. Sure, I'd love Fowler too. But Kulkov makes our team better than it was. Agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustache of God Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 I just see a swap of a combination of our forwards for Fowler to be a perfect match. How many forwards did Anaheim let go yesterday? Send them Kane and Girgensons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 Saying Kulikov solves "little to nothing", when Murray brought him in to play a top 4 role, when he played big minutes last year as a left shot D, and very well in the playoffs, is completely unfair. He's filling a need. Sure, I'd love Fowler too. But Kulkov makes our team better than it was. Maybe I was a little harsh, but he still has a lot to prove for me. I just see a swap of a combination of our forwards for Fowler to be a perfect match. How many forwards did Anaheim let go yesterday? Send them Kane and Girgensons. Hopefully they take Kane + picks or something like that. Ideally I only lose 1 forward here, but again, that's ideally. Ideally they give us Hampus for an Eichel autograph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 For what? For him to play on the 3rd line and protect Girgensons? Or to get arrested? I honestly see no value in him here other than hope and a low cap hit. Not only are we packed at forwards now, but we're still thin on the blue line. Kulikov solves little to nothing for us. Fowler is a need, Kane isn't even a benefitKane will probably get ~20 goals from the third line, all while helping Larsson pin the other team's best offensive line in their own zone. How is that not a benefit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 Kane will probably get ~20 goals from the third line, all while helping Larsson pin the other team's best offensive line in their own zone. How is that not a benefit? You're funny, you think Bylsma is going to keep him on the 3rd line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 You're funny, you think Bylsma is going to keep him on the 3rd line.DO NOT INTERRUPT ME WHEN I AM IN PEGASUS COVE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 Kane O'Reilly Okposo Vesey Eichel Reinhart Foligno Larsson Gionta Moulson Girgesons Ennis (wasn't this our top line a few years ago?) Deslauriers Kulikov Ristolainen Gorges Bogosian McCabe Franson Nelson Lehner Backup Goalie Not a bad lineup but could definitely use some tweaking. Would love to move some of those "4th" liners for an upgrade at defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 I like a three-line team, each line centred by one of our three best players. Okposo Eichel Vesey Ennis Reinhart Kane Gionta O'Reilly Girgensons Foligno Larsson Deslauriers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 (edited) Vesey - O'Reilly - Okposo Kane - Eichel - Reinhart Ennis- Larsson - Gionta Girgnenson- Schaller- Foligno Deslauriers Kulikov - Risto McCabe - Bogosian Gorges - Nelson Franson (don't know how his concussion issues are though) Lehner Enroth Edit: I even completely forgot about Moulson, damn he has a batlle ahead of him for a roster spot. Edited July 2, 2016 by Huckleberry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 Maybe I was a little harsh, but he still has a lot to prove for me. Hopefully they take Kane + picks or something like that. Ideally I only lose 1 forward here, but again, that's ideally. Ideally they give us Hampus for an Eichel autograph Oh for sure. I agree, he has a lot to prove, especilly when it looks like we will be leaning on him hard. Kane O'Reilly Okposo Vesey Eichel Reinhart Foligno Larsson Gionta Moulson Girgesons Ennis (wasn't this our top line a few years ago?) Deslauriers Kulikov Ristolainen Gorges Bogosian McCabe Franson Nelson Lehner Backup Goalie Not a bad lineup but could definitely use some tweaking. Would love to move some of those "4th" liners for an upgrade at defense. My forward lineup with Mr. Vesey is pretty close to this. I'd like to see: Ennis - O'Reilly - Okposo Vesey - Eichel - Reinhart Kane - Larsson - Gionta Foligno - Girgensons - Deslauriers Sans Vesey I'd like to try: Kane - O'Reilly - Okposo Ennis - Eichel - Reinhart Foligno - Larsson - Gionta Deslauriers - Girgensons - Moulson Like the look of the pure talent on line 2 in the first lineup, provided they could manage some defence. And line 3 could be quite effective with a guy like Kane there. Good depth. In the second lineup, the top line would be exceptionally difficult to play against, and line two should feast on good matchups. Don't think we need to add anything at forward beyond potentially Vesey. Both scenarios have Girgensons as a 4C which could be seen as a bit of a luxury considering our defence. So I could see him included in a package to add a D man, although short of Fowler popping lose, I'm not sure Murray wants to add there, as he seems okay with Kulikov, McCabe and Gorges on the left side, currently. May just be looking at adds of Vesey, and a depth forward and defenceman. And obviously a backup goalie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 apparently I missed schaller signing with the bruins him :censored: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 I know we've all penciled in Vesey-Eichel-Reinhart since Vesey's rights were acquired, but do we really think that's a good idea? Those are three players with a total of 169 games played and none of them are known to be outstanding defensive players. There's also not a lick of physicality there. Reinhart and Eichel were so fun together, but if Vesey really wants/needs to play with Eichel it might be better to split them up and put Okposo on the other wing. Or if Vesey can play with O'Reilly then you can put Kane there. Or, the wet dream for some on the board, Girgensons goes to Eichel's wing. We've got options. I'll play the game TB did above and mix and match a bit. His first lineup above with Larsson and Girgensons switched is the lineup I would probably piece together if I were to guess the lines Bylsma goes with. If splitting up Eichel and Reinhart is a possibility then: Kane - O'Reilly - Reinhart Vesey - Eichel - Okposo Foligno - Girgensons - Ennis Deslauriers - Larsson - Gionta If they would rather get Reinhart to center now and think O'Reilly's true long-term position is on the wing then this could be a possibility at some point: O'Reilly - Reinhart - Ennis Vesey - Eichel - Okposo Kane - Girgensons - Bailey? Foligno - Larsson - Gionta Revising my thoughts here and working under the assumption that Vesey isn't in our lineup because he's a free agent as far as I'm concerned. (No, I'm not drinking the negativity juice, just want to factor exclusively what we know we have) Kane - O'Reilly - Okposo Ennis - Eichel - Reinhart Foligno - Girgensons - Bailey Moulson - Larsson - Gionta Deslauriers That's how I'm feeling as it currently stands. I'm not phenomenally confident that this mixed with our decent-but-not-great defense is getting us to the playoffs. I think it's a lineup that can compete with the big chunk of teams that will be vying for the last few spots, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 Boy, I'd love to see Girgs, Larsson and Bailey on a 3rd line together but that leaves us centerless on the 4th line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 Boy, I'd love to see Girgs, Larsson and Bailey on a 3rd line together but that leaves us centerless on the 4th line.Just sign or promote someone for 4th line center duty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoPre Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 (edited) Just sign or promote someone for 4th line center duty. I gotta agree w/ We've on this one. Keep Larsson as the 3rd line center. Drop Girgensons to the 4th line. Sabres have depth at center. So play them, minus Reinhart, at center. Edited July 2, 2016 by GoPre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 I gotta agree w/ We've on this one. Keep Larsson as the 3rd line center. Drop Girgensons to the 4th line. Sabres have depth at center. So play them, minus Reinhart, at center. Then we arent agreeing. Just sign or promote someone for 4th line center duty. Ugh. No more Shallers and Ellises. Sign an actual NHLer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoPre Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 Then we arent agreeing. Ugh. No more Shallers and Ellises. Sign an actual NHLer. :doh: It's 4th of July weekend. Get a little slack, right? Keep Larson as the 3rd line center. Have Girgensons on the 4th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 Revising my thoughts here and working under the assumption that Vesey isn't in our lineup because he's a free agent as far as I'm concerned. (No, I'm not drinking the negativity juice, just want to factor exclusively what we know we have) Kane - O'Reilly - Okposo Ennis - Eichel - Reinhart Foligno - Girgensons - Bailey Moulson - Larsson - Gionta Deslauriers That's how I'm feeling as it currently stands. I'm not phenomenally confident that this mixed with our decent-but-not-great defense is getting us to the playoffs. I think it's a lineup that can compete with the big chunk of teams that will be vying for the last few spots, though. Yup we have the same top 2 lines, just a little bit of shuffling on lines 3 and 4. Think this is a good rough estimate to how it shakes out. Looking at the lineup, adding Okposo seems to have been imperative. It's giving us some much needed additional skill in the top 6, a quality veteran presence to go with the youth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 (edited) Then we arent agreeing. Ugh. No more Shallers and Ellises. Sign an actual NHLer. Legwand ? The more I think about it I don't think about it, Kane will have to make sure he can score at a top 6 LW pace. Wouldn't be surprised that by november its looks like this. But if Vesey signs with us everything changes again and someone will need to go. Moulson - O'Reilly - Okposo Ennis - Eichel - Reinhart Kane - Larsson - Gionta Foligno - Girgensons - Deslauriers. The only thing is, Girgensons might find himself to be to good for a 4C ? Still prefer larsson on 3C though, better at face offs. Edited July 3, 2016 by Huckleberry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 (edited) Legwand ? The more I think about it I don't think about it, Kane will have to make sure he can score at a top 6 LW pace. Wouldn't be surprised that by november its looks like this. But if Vesey signs with us everything changes again and someone will need to go. Moulson - O'Reilly - Okposo Ennis - Eichel - Reinhart Kane - Larsson - Gionta Foligno - Girgensons - Deslauriers. The only thing is, Girgensons might find himself to be to good for a 4C ? Still prefer larsson on 3C though, better at face offs. So you'd demote Kane to the 3rd line in order to put Moulson on the top line? I don't see that as likely at all. Since Vesey isn't signed (I still think he will be and I think we could sign him sooner if we give him permission to speak to anyone he wants for a week to expedite the process) I think Ennis gets the promotion from 4th line duties from my previous version. Ennis O'Reilly Okposo Kane Eichel Reinhart Foligno Larsson Gionta Deslauriers Girgensons Moulson Edited July 3, 2016 by Drunkard 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.