Toggle sidebar

Rumor: Trade Rumor Thread IV - "What's all the roar over RoR?"

Status
Not open for further replies.
RGY said:
Maybe Torts should stop putting Richards in spots to fail. I know he makes a lot of money and should be in all the go to situations in many people's minds, but he certainly should not be taking important faceoffs anymore. That would help Richards win half the battle. Less responsibility. Shortened training camp for a guy who was not playing during the lockout because he was heavily involved in the cba discussions. It has a lot to do with his slow start.
Click to expand...

This is a reasonable argument. But who would you want taking the faceoffs? Halpern? Miller? The problem is, even in a diminished capacity, Richards is still probably the best two-way center on the roster.

It'd be awesome if we could ease his ice time as he (hopefully) gets his legs under him, but the dilemma then is, who?
 
tjs252 said:
This is a reasonable argument. But who would you want taking the faceoffs? Halpern? Miller? The problem is, even in a diminished capacity, Richards is still probably the best two-way center on the roster.

It'd be awesome if we could ease his ice time as he (hopefully) gets his legs under him, but the dilemma then is, who?
Click to expand...
We need to trade for The Anton. Simple as that
 
tjs252 said:
This is a reasonable argument. But who would you want taking the faceoffs? Halpern? Miller? The problem is, even in a diminished capacity, Richards is still probably the best two-way center on the roster.

It'd be awesome if we could ease his ice time as he (hopefully) gets his legs under him, but the dilemma then is, who?
Click to expand...

Umm Stepan?...who won the previous faceoff last night but the puck hit his right skate and allowed montreal to ice the puck. Or Boyle who has gotten better of late. Or yes even Halpern. Anyone of those three over Richards.
 
I really would love to step in and grab O'Reilly at this point. Its obvious he's done as an AV, and he would be a huge get for this team, imo.
 
haveandare said:
Still, even if Bergeron scored, say, 55 points both of those 70+ point seasons, he'd still have years and years of putting up the points that ROR has exactly once.
Click to expand...

Gotta stop using points as a basis. The two situations and eras are completely different. Even the Rangers had several 20+ goal scorers after the lockout.

But if we are talking stats, no one is even suggesting O'Reilly will ever put up 70 points. But it's not necessary, either. He has 60 point upside, at least. Taking into account the defensive play, work ethic, and the rest that he brings, he's a #1-#2 center.

Hope this thread doesn't get derailed into a O'Reilly vs Bergeron discussion.

O'Reilly is exactly the kind of player that Jeff Gorton loves, and Tortorella loves. He would fit perfectly into what the team's identity was last year.
 
Lets keep it close to the topic. ROR's father doesn't need to be a central point of discussion, though I understand his statement does have an affect on proceedings.

Just doesn't seem like something that needs to be debated.
 
Fleury4ever said:
Unless Lindros had two dads named "Darius Kasparaitis" and "Scott Stevens", I don't think his dad was the big problem.
Click to expand...

His dad still feuded with the Flyers organization, despite getting the trade he wanted.

Who says ROR doesn't pull the same **** with us down the line? He's a player that doesn't seem to want a bridge contract, people expect Sather to break the line and bend backwards for him? I'd say there is a better chance of him trading for Crosby than overpaying a RFA with one good year.
 
Kershaw said:
His dad still feuded with the Flyers organization, despite getting the trade he wanted.

Who says ROR doesn't pull the same **** with us down the line? He's a player that doesn't seem to want a bridge contract, people expect Sather to break the line and bend backwards for him? I'd say there is a better chance of him trading for Crosby than overpaying a RFA with one good year.
Click to expand...

What people? I have yet to see a single person advocate that. Just more conjecture.
 
Trxjw said:
What people? I have yet to see a single person advocate that. Just more conjecture.
Click to expand...

Okay true, but what reason does O'Reilly have to sign here then? None, because Sather won't pay him, just like the Avs won't pay him.
 
Kershaw said:
Okay true, but what reason does O'Reilly have to sign here then? None, because Sather won't pay him, just like the Avs won't pay him.
Click to expand...

A fresh start? Bad blood that developed with the Avs front office? Loves good bagels and pizza? Who really knows at this point? All people are saying is that if the deal makes sense, it's a good addition to the team.
 
Trxjw said:
A fresh start? Bad blood that developed with the Avs front office? Loves good bagels and pizza? Who really knows at this point? All people are saying is that if the deal makes sense, it's a good addition to the team.
Click to expand...

imo, he's butthurt that Landeskog was named captain. That's what my Avs friend buddy at school is suggesting. He posts here on HF.
 
Trxjw said:
Other than his Dad's letter that was posted online today, there's nothing new to report.
Click to expand...

Thanks!

This certainly makes a lot of sense from both parties' perspective. To me, it comes down to:

1) Is ROR really asking for crazy money? If so, Slats says no.
2) Does Colorado think they can get the Rangers to add more to MDZ? If so, Slats says no.
3) Does Slats think that the team simply needs time to gel after all the turnover? If so, Slats says no.

BUT, if all those are answered in the negative, then the deal does make sense based purely on value and both organizations' needs.

I will say, the more I see of Richards, the more I'm in favor of the move. I was already thinking that it may be a good idea to buy him out NEXT summer based purely on his contract and age, but if you've got a solid, young top 6 replacement available NOW, maybe it accelerates everything.

As they say, you can't time the market.
 
Last edited:
Callagraves said:
:::blankstare:::

Eh, lost me at "life coach".


But just because his old man is trying to blow sunshine up the world's ass doesn't mean Ryan buys into it.
Click to expand...

Hahaha. Yeah, me too.

It gets worse if you actually click on the link. I read about 4 "sentences" (I use that term loosely) and then had to navigate away.

The best thing about that article? Apparently his father's email was edited for grammar and punctuation! Did they edit it to make it WORSE? :laugh:
 
SupersonicMonkey said:
Gotta stop using points as a basis. The two situations and eras are completely different. Even the Rangers had several 20+ goal scorers after the lockout.

But if we are talking stats, no one is even suggesting O'Reilly will ever put up 70 points. But it's not necessary, either. He has 60 point upside, at least. Taking into account the defensive play, work ethic, and the rest that he brings, he's a #1-#2 center.

Hope this thread doesn't get derailed into a O'Reilly vs Bergeron discussion.

O'Reilly is exactly the kind of player that Jeff Gorton loves, and Tortorella loves. He would fit perfectly into what the team's identity was last year.
Click to expand...

I don't want to make it O'Reilly vs. Bergeron, I just think that the comparison and the differences I see between them are exactly why I'm wary of getting O'Reilly. I think he's a similar player to Stepan and I think that this team needs more skill at center. O'Reilly fits the system perfectly, but you don't need and can't win with a lineup of all those types of guys. Stepan is that type of guy. Miller may end up being that type of guy. Boyle, while not nearly as tenacious on offense, is also a defensive center. Richards is playing questionable hockey. I think if we're going to move a big piece like MDZ for a center, which isn't a bad idea overall, it should be someone who is more skilled offensively. Maybe the front office guys have a lot of faith that ROR will be able to step up offensively. If so, I'm willing to trust them. I'm just worried that the team is going to lose a good asset and open up a hole on D for a guy that isn't very different from what we've already got and doesn't address a pressing need.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom