Joey Bones
***** 2k16
Like I'm just confused that they'd rather sign depth guys and kill their chances on getting a guy like Nate Schmidt. Idk maybe I'm over looking things
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Like I'm just confused that they'd rather sign depth guys and kill their chances on getting a guy like Nate Schmidt. Idk maybe I'm over looking things
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
It doesn't kill their chances in any way.Like I'm just confused that they'd rather sign depth guys and kill their chances on getting a guy like Nate Schmidt. Idk maybe I'm over looking things
Joey Bones
***** 2k16
The Gloaming
23
That's the charity NHLPA game for Sandy that took place during the lockout in AC.
This is clearly Sather's answer to the Iginla trade. We finally made a huge splash by acquiring a game-breaking right defenseman. The missing piece ladies and gentlemen. Carry on. ****ing scrub for the AHL. Nothin more, nothin less. Tortorella is going to need more D options after tonight's shalacking at the hands of the angry midgets in red.
Seems like a good source to me...
I think we just found our Torts replacement behind the bench!
SauceCheese91
Registered User
- Sep 14, 2011
- 395
- 0
I'll post a bigger review later, but I have season tickets to the London Knights and have gone to pretty much every game this year. Not a player you get super excited about, as he is strictly a stay at home D man. He's got some decent size and grit and could be a good AHL- bottom pairing D at the NHL level. Low risk signing, as the Knights have a history of producing good players and for that matter under the radar players.
is Brenden Dillon a good comparison??
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players/bio/?id=7513
he was undrafted signed as a out of the WHL as a 21 year old..
NYR Viper
Registered User
SauceCheese91
Registered User
- Sep 14, 2011
- 395
- 0
Don't know much about Dillon to be honest, but judging by the stats he is a bit more physical then Hughes. I also wanted to bring up the Girardi comparison as I think they are the same type of player, although Girardi had a bit more offensive upside when he was with the Knights. Hughes is strictly a stay at home D man, great positioning and defensive awareness. He knows how to get physical and he reminds me of a classic pickup of a guy who could add some depth at the AHL or bottom pairing NHL level. But hey Dan Girardi was thought of the same way, maybe even less, so you never know what these low risk guys can turn in to.
Hughes is a big, mobile, stay at home defenseman. He's definitely not much of a factor offensively, and he'll have to improve his first pass out of the zone to reach the NHL level, but he has potential. He's physical when he needs to be and is a smart positional defender. He's a good shot blocker and was a real leader for the Knights this year (wore a letter).
I'm a tad surprised that he got a contract, but I don't think it's a useless signing. He has the potential to develop into a solid bottom pairing guy if he can improve his puck skills to the point where he's able to handle a forecheck at the next level. Defensively, I'm not too worried about him.
I'm a tad surprised that he got a contract, but I don't think it's a useless signing. He has the potential to develop into a solid bottom pairing guy if he can improve his puck skills to the point where he's able to handle a forecheck at the next level. Defensively, I'm not too worried about him.
NYR Viper
Registered User
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
http://www.nyrangersblog.com/2013-a...s-sign-undrafted-defenseman-tommy-hughes.html
But he's a stay-at-home kind of defenseman who has good size and is willing to play physically and drop the gloves. Ultimately, his upside is probably as a bottom-pairing defenseman in the mold of a John Erskine or Deryk Engelland
But he's a stay-at-home kind of defenseman who has good size and is willing to play physically and drop the gloves. Ultimately, his upside is probably as a bottom-pairing defenseman in the mold of a John Erskine or Deryk Engelland
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
Of course !
Dan Girardi's are just growing on tree's and of course we are the team tuned into them !
"He's not a force offensively, but he's a good stay at home that gives you solid defense on the backline". I'm just guessing that was said.
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
eco's bones
Registered User
He might be a good player for us some day--I would think the Rangers have taken a very close look at him for a while but whoever wrote that article comparing him to Erskine, Engelland is full of it. He's had two fights in his entire OHL career and didn't do particularly well in either of them. An Erskine or Engelland he ain't. That doesn't mean he isn't physical but both Erskine and Engelland are decent defenders who fight very, very well which allows them to be very mean crease clearers. Hughes doesn't seem to quite fit that job description.
