Rumor: Trade Rumor/Speculation Thread XXVI: G Staying Put.

[SnowblindNYR]

Something no one thought about. Seems like St. Louis (the team) is out of the running for Cally. What happens if MSL falls through?

 

[aufheben]

It's funny, every time I read a post by you, it's the only one making sense. Literally every time. Get these logical arguments out of here and instead keep throwing out tired cliches.

Yeah, because mentioning teams that went home empty handed refutes everything when we're talking about Cup winners.

Great, maybe we can be the 2004 Calgary Flames and have our hearts broken and complain about a blown call until 2024 and onward.

 

[GregSirico]

Oh really. Ok, let me throw some history at you.

2013 - Toews
2012 - Kopitar, Richards, Carter
2011 - Bergeron , Kreicji
2010 - Toews
2009 - Crosby, Malkin
2008 - Datsyuk, Zetterberg
2007 - Getzlaf
2006 - Eric Staal


That's every year since the lockout. EVERY SINGLE YEAR. The only arguable team without an elite center was that Boston squad. And they had 2 centers, who are the #1's on our team.

And, personally, I think Bergeron should qualify as an elite center.

So, what's your plan if you were the GM?

 

[SupersonicMonkey*]

Oh really. Ok, let me throw some history at you.

2013 - Toews
2012 - Kopitar, Richards, Carter
2011 - Bergeron , Kreicji
2010 - Toews
2009 - Crosby, Malkin
2008 - Datsyuk, Zetterberg
2007 - Getzlaf
2006 - Eric Staal


That's every year since the lockout. EVERY SINGLE YEAR. The only arguable team without an elite center was that Boston squad. And they had 2 centers, who are the #1's on our team.

And, personally, I think Bergeron should qualify as an elite center.

And those un-great Boston centers got to two Stanley Cup Finals in a four year span. Won one of them, and beat three of our centers handily, on route to one of those Stanley Cup Finals.

 

[AHB*]

There's not something magical about the playoffs that makes it so teams with their talent concentrated at center ice will win at a higher rate.

The '04 Flames had Craig Conroy as their top center (and no offense from their blueline) and would have won the Cup if it weren't for a blown call. The '06 Oilers and Shawn Horcoff also were a game from winning the Cup. Were these teams doomed from the start because of their personnel?

These are nearly 10 years ago.

Also add into that Horcoff was nearly a PPG that year and Stoll was the #2 with 69 points. Both far more productive then any center we currently have.

Not elite, but #1's that year.

Neither team won the cup and i Discount teams before the lockout for good reason, it was a different type of game.

 

[aufheben]

Oh really. Ok, let me throw some history at you.

2013 - Toews
2012 - Kopitar, Richards, Carter
2011 - Bergeron , Kreicji
2010 - Toews
2009 - Crosby, Malkin
2008 - Datsyuk, Zetterberg
2007 - Getzlaf
2006 - Eric Staal


That's every year since the lockout. EVERY SINGLE YEAR. The only arguable team without an elite center was that Boston squad. And they had 2 centers, who are the #1's on our team.

And, personally, I think Bergeron should qualify as an elite center.

2013 - Keith, Seabrook
2012 - Doughty
2011 - Chara
2010 - Keith, Seabrook
2009 - Gonchar, Letang
2008 - Lidstrom, Rafalski
2007 - Niedermayer, Pronger
2006 - Kaberle, Hedican

 

[SupersonicMonkey*]

Where is Dagoon when you need him Any updates anywhere on the interwebs.

 

[AHB*]

So, what's your plan if you were the GM?

Find a way to get a 1st line center, or at least get some sort of prospect in the system that can become one.

Not trade our prospects and picks away for a guy turning 39 during the playoffs.

Making a shrewd trade for a guy like Seguin, Filip Forsberg, etc.

I don't have a perfect recipe, I'm saying, the recipe we have as it currently stands, doesn't get us a cup in all likelihood, with or without MSL.

 

[Slick Rick 61]

I have a feeling that the Rangers will hang on to Callahan as their own rental. With Girardi signed, they don't run the risk of losing two players who would bring good assets back for nothing. They can bite the bullet for one of them, and with the mega deal the Blues made, I don't see a deal for Callahan. Just my .02.

 

[Kakko]

I'm over it. Auf out. If the only refutation to all this is the 1995 Devils and teams that didn't even win the Cup, I don't see where this is going. To each his own.

There is a pretty simple refutation to all of this. There've been 95 Stanley cup winners. Maybe 15 or so in the 'modern' NHL.

Things are different every year. You don't need to imitate past winners. You need to become future winners.

Until two years ago, nothing lower than a 5th seed ever won the cup. Hockey has a young history. History is made in some way every year.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Yeah, because mentioning teams that went home empty handed refutes everything when we're talking about Cup winners.

Great, maybe we can be the 2004 Calgary Flames and have our hearts broken and complain about a blown call until 2024 and onward.

This idea by hockey fans that winning is black and white is ridiculous. Did the refs blow the call because of Calgary's poor center depth? It was a factor that had nothing to do with center ice depth.

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

These are nearly 10 years ago.

Also add into that Horcoff was nearly a PPG that year and Stoll was the #2 with 69 points. Both far more productive then any center we currently have.

Not elite, but #1's that year.

Neither team won the cup and i Discount teams before the lockout for good reason, it was a different type of game.

NHL GAA was 2.93 in 05-06 and it's 2.56 this year on a pretty steady path of decline if we want to take this Shawn Horcoff in 2006-themed argument a step further

 

[AHB*]

2013 - Keith, Seabrook
2012 - Doughty
2011 - Chara
2010 - Keith, Seabrook
2009 - Gonchar, Letang
2008 - Lidstrom, Rafalski
2007 - Niedermayer, Pronger
2006 - Kaberle, Hedican

Top D and Centers are the two most important. Non-elite goalies get hot every year and drag their teams deep in the playoffs.

I love Hank, he's my favorite Ranger, but we'd have a much better chance with Crawford in net and an elite center at the helm, in my opinion.

Goalies are important, but not as much as they were during the trap era and certainly not more then high end centers.

 

[GregSirico]

Find a way to get a 1st line center, or at least get some sort of prospect in the system that can become one.

Not trade our prospects and picks away for a guy turning 39 during the playoffs.

Making a shrewd trade for a guy like Seguin, Filip Forsberg, etc.

I don't have a perfect recipe, I'm saying, the recipe we have as it currently stands, doesn't get us a cup in all likelihood, with or without MSL.

In order to get an "elite 1C" as you see fit .. you would have to give up a lot ... more than you think ... ADDITIONALLY .. to get a pick THEN develop him .... you're talking years ... this team might be at the end of the window when he is ready to make an impact.

 

[Thirty One]

Yeah, because mentioning teams that went home empty handed refutes everything when we're talking about Cup winners.

The Stanley Cup is awarded once per year. It's pretty much the lowest sample size stat imaginable.

Of course teams with strong centers will perform better in the playoffs. Same with strong winger, defensemen, goalies. To say that it's an absolute necessity is silly, IMO.

 

[jskramer83]

Something no one thought about. Seems like St. Louis (the team) is out of the running for Cally. What happens if MSL falls through?

This is very true, lets hope all our eggs aren't in one basket. If this St Louis thing isn't finalized in the next few days, time to move on.

 

[aufheben]

There is a pretty simple refutation to all of this. There've been 95 Stanley cup winners. Maybe 15 or so in the 'modern' NHL.

Things are different every year. You don't need to imitate past winners. You need to become future winners.

Until two years ago, nothing lower than a 5th seed ever won the cup. Hockey has a young history. History is made in some way every year.

Where's the refutation? The Kings didn't acquire Jeff Carter until the trade deadline, so we don't need a #1 center?

 

[SupersonicMonkey*]

There is a pretty simple refutation to all of this. There've been 95 Stanley cup winners. Maybe 15 or so in the 'modern' NHL.

Things are different every year. You don't need to imitate past winners. You need to become future winners.

Until two years ago, nothing lower than a 5th seed ever won the cup. Hockey has a young history. History is made in some way every year.

Hockey, in forms, has over a five thousand year old history.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

I think we're definitely going to get to XXX.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

In last years playoffs, Toews had 3 goals and 11 assissts in 23 games, I wouldn't exactly call that leading the Blackhawks to the cup

 

[Thirty One]

Where is Dagoon when you need him Any updates anywhere on the interwebs.

aufheben pulled a Dagoon:

I'm over it. Auf out.

 

[jerseyjinx94]

Oh really. Ok, let me throw some history at you.

2013 - Toews
2012 - Kopitar, Richards, Carter
2011 - Bergeron , Kreicji
2010 - Toews
2009 - Crosby, Malkin
2008 - Datsyuk, Zetterberg
2007 - Getzlaf
2006 - Eric Staal


That's every year since the lockout. EVERY SINGLE YEAR. The only arguable team without an elite center was that Boston squad. And they had 2 centers, who are the #1's on our team.

And, personally, I think Bergeron should qualify as an elite center.

Right - and EVERY SINGLE ONE one of those teams had a goalie that got hot.

Crawford (not elite) - 16-7, 1.84 GAA, .932 SPCT last season.

You can make a correlation based on those centers existing on their teams being the reason they won the Cup. But every one had a goaltender who was ridiculous in the playoffs.

I don't know what this pre-lockout, post-lockout relevance thing is. A goltender can carry a team to a Cup. You can have a really good player play like an elite player in the playoffs, and then your theory goes down the tubes. It's happened before. It will happen again.

Sidney Crosby, mister Elite Center, didn't win the Cup. Why? Because his goaltender played like a mite. Simple to me. You're looking at roster constructions of previous cup winners and saying that ours has to be similar for us to win. I don't buy it. Different teams win in different ways, but one thing is always there - a hot goaltender.

 

[Thirty One]

Hockey, in forms, has over a five thousand year old history.

Centers were always crucial, though.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

The reason I like 31 is because he seems to be the only person that doesn't have the macho hockey fan attitude that winning means you're the objectively better team, so they can brag about how much of a competitor they are and how much they like winning. He understands the context of luck and probability. Everyone else seems to think that a team that won a game that involves so much possible luck is objectively better and if you lost you're objectively worse and can't be brought up as an example of anything having to do with success. It's an incredibly inflexible and stubborn attitude.

 

[GregSirico]

The Stanley Cup is awarded once per year. It's pretty much the lowest sample size stat imaginable.

Of course teams with strong centers will perform better in the playoffs. Same with strong winger, defensemen, goalies. To say that it's an absolute necessity is silly, IMO.

Agreed