The Armchair GM Thread - Part XXXIII

monster_bertuzzi · Mar 4, 2013

live playoff hockey said:
I think Higgins/Hansen are good second liners if there is someone to carry that second line. They are for sure elite third liners though

They are very good 3rd liners, but crappy 2nd liners.

Vankiller Whale · Mar 4, 2013

monster_bertuzzi said:
They are very good 3rd liners, but crappy 2nd liners.

Virtually every team in the league has at least one crappy 2nd liner.

arsmaster* · Mar 4, 2013

monster_bertuzzi said:
They are very good 3rd liners, but crappy 2nd liners.

They are tweeners.

It's not just that it seems we have a large abundance of tweeners, it just seems the mix and chemistry is bad.

Probably equally on the management (personnel) and the system (coaching).

y2kcanucks · Mar 4, 2013

arsmaster said:
They are tweeners.

It's not just that it seems we have a large abundance of tweeners, it just seems the mix and chemistry is bad.

Probably equally on the management (personnel) and the system (coaching).

Agreed. I said back in July we have too many tweeners and need a legitimate top talent added to our forward group, most everyone said we'd be fine. Guess I was right.

Tiranis · Mar 4, 2013

I just don't get by what standard they're crappy 2nd liners. Seems like they're crappy because they're on our team and they're not super high-skill guys. All 3 of Ryamond, Higgins and Hansen have significantly outproduced Mike Richards at ES this season and have matched him for the 2 years prior. Their possession stats are excellent as well.

I'm still looking for something that backs up this assertion that they're tweeners, 3rd liners, etc. rather than just repeating it over and over as if that proves anything. Would it be nice to add another high-end forward? Sure. Every team would love that, but there's a ton of talent on this team as it is.

Pip · Mar 4, 2013

To be a second liner like Richards, you must party like Mike Richards. Raymond, Hansen, and Higgins obviously lack in that department

Scurr · Mar 4, 2013

y2kcanucks said:
Agreed. I said back in July we have too many tweeners and need a legitimate top talent added to our forward group, most everyone said we'd be fine. Guess I was right.

3rd in the west without kes is fine. Beating the kings without kes was better than fine. We're at least fine.... Probably better than that.

I'm with Tiranis, of course we'd love to upgrade but our wingers are good players, so that's difficult. What we really need right now is more players playing well. The last couple games have been a step in the right direction.

LolClarkson* · Mar 4, 2013

How does Hemsky for Bieksa sound ?

We would have a hole on the back end but thats the way it goes.

Nuckles · Mar 4, 2013

Goldrunner said:
How does Hemsky for Bieksa sound ?

We would have a hole on the back end but thats the way it goes.

We'd also have a hole on the front end once Hemsky gets injured in his first 5 games with us.
And no way in hell does Bieksa waive his NTC to go to Edmonton.

Angry Little Elf · Mar 4, 2013

Goldrunner said:
How does Hemsky for Bieksa sound ?

We would have a hole on the back end but thats the way it goes.

Bieksa has an NTC... :p:

Pip · Mar 4, 2013

Goldrunner said:
How does Hemsky for Bieksa sound ?

We would have a hole on the back end but thats the way it goes.

I would be on board, and I think Bieksa is exactly what they need. The division thing is sketchy but I think we could then package up a forward and a pick for a decent defenseman

lol forgot about the NTC, every ****ing player on this team has a NTC!

Proto · Mar 4, 2013

Ballard for Pajaarvi and a 2nd. This is the perfect time to fleece the Oilers for Pajaarvi, and it actually makes sense for the Oilers too.

Proto · Mar 4, 2013

Goldrunner said:
How does Hemsky for Bieksa sound ?

We would have a hole on the back end but thats the way it goes.

Wouldn't touch that trade at all.

Pip · Mar 4, 2013

Proto said:
Ballard for Pajaarvi and a 2nd. This is the perfect time to fleece the Oilers for Pajaarvi, and it actually makes sense for the Oilers too.

I would be happy with hartikainen, I really like his skillset.

LolClarkson* · Mar 4, 2013

Nuckles37 said:
We'd also have a hole on the front end once Hemsky gets injured in his first 5 games with us.
And no way in hell does Bieksa waive his NTC to go to Edmonton.

OMFG Bieksa got a NTC on his new deal... He didn't on his first one. Why the hell do they hand those out so easy..

Anyway I bounced it off some Oilers fans and they would probably do it.

PRNuck · Mar 4, 2013

Proto said:
Ballard for Pajaarvi and a 2nd. This is the perfect time to fleece the Oilers for Pajaarvi, and it actually makes sense for the Oilers too.

I dont' actually pay attention to the Oilers, why is it the perfect time to fleece them?

Proto said:
Wouldn't touch that trade at all.

Me neither, and I don't even like Bieksa.

Tiranis · Mar 4, 2013

Goldrunner said:
Anyway I bounced it off some Oilers fans and they would probably do it.

That's because it's a horrible trade for us.

Addison Rae · Mar 4, 2013

Goldrunner said:
How does Hemsky for Bieksa sound ?

We would have a hole on the back end but thats the way it goes.

No, the teams has seem to crumble without Bieksa.

Addison Rae · Mar 4, 2013

Proto said:
Ballard for Pajaarvi and a 2nd. This is the perfect time to fleece the Oilers for Pajaarvi, and it actually makes sense for the Oilers too.

So down. Would be amazing if we could do that.

Pip · Mar 4, 2013

Let's be honest, we ain't getting MPS for Ballard, especially not with a pick as well

LolClarkson* · Mar 4, 2013

PRNuck said:
I dont' actually pay attention to the Oilers, why is it the perfect time to fleece them?

Me neither, and I don't even like Bieksa.

Trade Lou to fill the hole at the back.

Why would it be such a bad deal for us ? I think Bieksa is slightly over rated here because of our system.

Pip · Mar 4, 2013

I would be interested to know why it's so bad as well. Hemsky is quite the dynamic forward

Free Edler · Mar 4, 2013

Goldrunner said:
Trade Lou to fill the hole at the back.

Why would it be such a bad deal for us ? I think Bieksa is slightly over rated here because of our system.

If he plays fine within our system, where's the need to trade him? Wouldn't touch Hemsky with a 10-foot pole. Way too injury prone.

Proto · Mar 4, 2013

live playoff hockey said:
Let's be honest, we ain't getting MPS for Ballard, especially not with a pick as well

Why? They're benching him, giving him zero minutes, and generally seem to have no understanding that he's actually playing well and should be in their Top 6. They're desperate for defensemen. I think that trade could happen.

Wheatley · Mar 4, 2013

live playoff hockey said:
The Hawks have 4 first line players (Toews, Kane, Hossa, Sharp) but their depth is really bad and we have many more 2nd line/borderline 2nd line players.

That's actually not true. Just because they may not be household names yet doesn't mean they're not good players.

After the big four, they've got Brandan Saad, Andrew Shaw, Victor Stahlberg, Marcus Kruger, Michael Frolik, Byian Bickell, Dave Bolland and Jamal Mayers.

Pretty damn comparable to our team if you ask me, not to mention their big four is better than ours to begin with.

The Armchair GM Thread - Part XXXIII

registered user

Fire Benning

arsmaster*

Guest

Better than you

Registered User

Registered User

Registered User

LolClarkson*

Guest

_________

My wife came back

Registered User

Registered User

Registered User

Registered User

LolClarkson*

Guest

Registered User

Registered User

Registered User

Registered User

Registered User

LolClarkson*

Guest

Registered User

Enjoy retirement, boys.

Registered User

We Rabite You

Ad

Ad

Ad