Shesterkybomb
Registered User
- Dec 30, 2016
- 17,659
- 19,368
I’m watching a team that is 1-4-1.
If you think he's the reason for that i dont know what to tell you.
I’m watching a team that is 1-4-1.
Before everyone starts clamoring for Dunn- if we don’t move another D first we will certainly lose one of Dunn, Lindgren and ADA to Seattle.
Before everyone starts clamoring for Dunn- if we don’t move another D first we will certainly lose one of Dunn, Lindgren and ADA to Seattle or trade one beforehand at reduced value.
I love the idea of Eichel (Who wouldn't) But I just don't see a world where they trade him. I would assume they would acquire anything and anyone to keep him from leaving.Not sure why people think Eichel is still an option. Buffalo will move their franchise before they trade him.
I know the hate I will get for this but I might be the only one who thinks that Adam Fox is good, but not as great as people make him out to be just yet. Yes he does make some good plays with the puck but he does make a good amount of bone headed plays like fanning on passes and hanging on to the puck for too long. Kind of reminds me of a D version of Kevin Hayes in that regard. He is still our best overall RD at the moment but I’d take Miller over him right now.
We more or less made our bed by signing Strome to be 2C. I say we lie in it now, rather than overpay for a quick fix. Sure, our record will suffer and maybe we will change coaches. Not necessarily the worst that could happen.It's painfully obvious. We are going to have to overpay for a center.
We're thin and there's no one coming .
If we sign Barkov for no assets that most likely means Zibs is gone. We can't afford both.We more or less made our bed by signing Strome to be 2C. I say we lie in it now, rather than overpay for a quick fix. Sure, our record will suffer and maybe we will change coaches. Not necessarily the worst that could happen.
Bide our time for Eichel or Barkov or similar, preferably signing Barkov at no asset cost.
I don't know if that's necessarily true. We will have a roster that is mostly cost-controlled. A lot of dead cap will be off the books. Possibly the cap could rise.If we sign Barkov for no assets that most likely means Zibs is gone. We can't afford both.
No matter the scenario, we will have to trade for a cost-controlled center.
Certainly have to have a plan in place first, and if moving a player like ADA you need a clear indication that the team will significantly improve as a result.Especially given our start, I do not think it makes sense to start trading for players who are not expansion exempt. You don't even know if Dunn would be able to save this trainwreck.
I don't know if we can afford $20+ M for Zibs and a player like Barkov; then have enough space to re-sign, Laf, Kakko, Chytil, Fox, Lindgren, Miller, Shesterkin. Buch? etcI don't know if that's necessarily true. We will have a roster that is mostly cost-controlled. A lot of dead cap will be off the books. Possibly the cap could rise.
I dont think we know it would cost $20+M. Probably one agreement would be longer than the other, allowing us to move from one as a younger replacement is projected to step up.I don't know if we can afford $20+ M for Zibs and a player like Barkov; then have enough space to re-sign, Laf, Kakko, Chytil, Fox, Lindgren, Miller, Shesterkin. Buch? etc
We dont know what the cap is going to do or how long it will take revenue to get back on course.
Make way for the Steve Rucchins, Andrew Cassells, Robert Reichels and Travis Greens.If you build a team around elite wingers, who will eventually get paid if they are as advertised, you are going to have to go “dumpster diving” at C for the most part barring a string of kids coming through.
The Pens only had high $ wingers in spurts - Neal, Kessel, etc were never long term fixtures. Crosby and Malkin were the fixtures and the wingers rotated through.
NYR may have to take a similar approach at C.
You can’t have 2-3 big ticket wings, 2-3 big contracts on D, and 2-3 centers making high end money.
I will say this. I think it was a grave mistake by the front office to have their development plan focus on winning. I get it that they were afraid because the organization has had such success in the past couple years as well as our team turning into a perpetual loser like Edmonton and Buffalo.
but the truth of the matter is you have to sit before you can stand, stand before you can walk, and walk before you can run. Playoffs should not be the focus. The young players need reps. Meaning they need to be put in prime positions with the ice time and freedom to make mistakes and learn from them. What we have is a coach with a managerial viewpoint behind them that supports benching our young players to teach accountability and at the same time classically conditioning them to be afraid to make plays. While at the same time, not enforcing those same rules to vets because the directive as that the team needs to win and make the playoffs. It’s basic psychology 101 and it’s how to lose a room because the players can smell it from a mile away. We need to be focused on the young players getting their reps in now, making the mistakes, and learning from them now during the regular season. Playoffs should be a secondary focus.
I figure Buchnevich is going to get moved sooner rather than later, but they kinda almost have to keep him for the time being no?
Unless Kreider gets his head out of his ass and can make it work playing on the right next season. Every time they’ve put him on the right thus far he drifts back over to the left side
I figure Buchnevich is going to get moved sooner rather than later, but they kinda almost have to keep him for the time being no?
Unless Kreider gets his head out of his ass and can make it work playing on the right next season. Every time they’ve put him on the right thus far he drifts back over to the left side
You can’t have 2-3 big ticket wings, 2-3 big contracts on D, and 2-3 centers making high end money.