Jump to content


Photo

2016-'17 Lineup


  • Please log in to reply
2004 replies to this topic

#41 bob_sauve28

bob_sauve28

    First Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,864 posts

Posted 20 January 2016 - 10:28 AM

They will be getting a top 6 F in FA, no doubt about it. I also expect to see Ennis and McGinn traded for picks at the deadline with those picks being turned into another top 6 via trade.

That or a top d-man 



#42 jsb

jsb

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 690 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 21 January 2016 - 10:49 AM

Great posts in here!!!! If they can swing Boedker, I don't think they can afford Yandle. Goligoski will be cheaper. Pluses are we will be both younger, bigger and faster. I've been so impressed with the Bogosian-Risto pairing, I want them to stay together. I also want McCabe and Pysyk to play together again also.

 

My dream team

1a Kane-ROR-Reinhart

1b Boedker-Eichel-DraftChoice (1 of the Finns hopefully)

3  Girgs-Larrson-Fasching

4  Foligno-Schaller-Gionta

 

Bogo-Risto

Goligoski-(Whoever we can coup from the inevitable Ennis-Weber-Johnson-Franson trades coming up)

McCabe-Pysyk

 

Lehner

Ullmark



#43 WildCard

WildCard

    Gunner's Mate First Class: Philip A$$hole

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,397 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lost in a Supermarket

Posted 21 January 2016 - 11:45 AM

Any news on Reinhart?

#44 Doohickie

Doohickie

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,483 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 21 January 2016 - 08:36 PM

I searched teh intarwebz.  Nuthin since last night.



#45 Randall Flagg

Randall Flagg

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,016 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WNY

Posted 21 January 2016 - 09:41 PM

Disco said that he'd be evaluated today in Buffalo, but hasn't since been to the media, so while they probably have a good idea what's wrong we probably won't know until he does his usual game day media stuff tomorrow.

#46 LBJ18

LBJ18

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 26 January 2016 - 01:23 PM

Kane ROR Reinhart

Girgs Eichel draft pick

Ennis Larsson Gionta



#47 Hoss

Hoss

    Someday

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,017 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 26 January 2016 - 01:24 PM

Kane ROR Reinhart
Girgs Eichel draft pick
Ennis Larsson Gionta


I just vomited

#48 pi2000

pi2000

    The Church of Mouls... er Matthews

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,342 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 January 2016 - 01:26 PM

Kane ROR Reinhart

Girgs Eichel draft pick

Ennis Larsson Fasching

 

fixed



#49 LBJ18

LBJ18

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 26 January 2016 - 01:33 PM

I just vomited

Sorry, that's realistic.



#50 Hoss

Hoss

    Someday

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,017 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 26 January 2016 - 02:38 PM

Sorry, that's realistic.

The top six around this point last season:

Moulson - Ennis - Girgensons
Stewart - Hodgson - Stafford
Flynn - Mitchell - Gionta

Beginning of this year:

Moulson - O'Reilly - Ennis
Kane - Eichel - Gionta
McGinn - Larsson - Reinhart



I mocked up last year from the January 27th game based on TOI, so it's not 100% accurate but it was some iteration of that group...

Edited by Hoss, 26 January 2016 - 02:38 PM.


#51 Thorny

Thorny

    Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,732 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo, some day

Posted 26 January 2016 - 11:57 PM

I just vomited

 

In a negative way? I thought it looked pretty darn good



#52 Murray's Rats

Murray's Rats

    Since Gilbert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,727 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 27 January 2016 - 02:36 AM

Girgenson Eichel Fasching
Tkachuk ROR Reinhart
Kane Larsson Foligno
Deslaurier Schaller McGinn
Gionta Moulson

Fowler Ristolainen
McCabe/Guhle Bogosian
Gorges/McCabe Pysyk
Franson

#53 IrwinNelson

IrwinNelson

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 697 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 January 2016 - 08:35 AM

Girgenson Eichel Fasching
Tkachuk ROR Reinhart
Kane Larsson Foligno
Deslaurier Schaller McGinn
Gionta Moulson

Fowler Ristolainen
McCabe/Guhle Bogosian
Gorges/McCabe Pysyk
Franson

Neither of the bolded will be NHL ready next season. Laine, Matthews, and Poolparty are the only three likely to make the jump



#54 Crusader1969

Crusader1969

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,344 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 10:24 AM

It would be interesting to know who is furthest ahead in their development between Fasching, Bailey and Baptiste.

 

Personally I think Bailey has the highest upside long-term but I could see Baptiste, who is well regarded for his defensive side, being ready to play in NHL (3rd line) the soonest.

 

Im hoping the Sabres can sign Fasching as soon as his NCAA season is over and get him playing pro hockey this year.


Neither of the bolded will be NHL ready next season. Laine, Matthews, and Poolparty are the only three likely to make the jump

 

 

completely agree and no way Kane is a 3rd line winger nor would he be behind Fasching or Tkachuk on the depth chart.



#55 LBJ18

LBJ18

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 10:55 AM

Agreed^

 

I think Rob Ray said it last night, Kane needs to take a deep breath before he just rips one ten feet wide.  The guy also hits an ungodly amount of posts.  The shots are bound to fall sooner or later right?

 

I haven't had a chance to follow much of Bailey Baptiste and Fasching.  Are they really NHL ready next year? and top 6 ready? I find that hard to believe.

 

One question I have:

 

Are the ROR-Reinhart and Girgs-Eichel combos here to stay?



#56 Murray's Rats

Murray's Rats

    Since Gilbert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,727 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 27 January 2016 - 12:44 PM

I just like Kane with Foligno, those two could create some havoc with Larsson. Also, I know it's a bit of a stretch projecting Tkachuk and Fasching into top 6 right away but it happens every year. Duclair and Domi weren't expected to play in the NHL yet but look at them. All I know is that if th e Sabres enter into next year with the same top 6-9 then we can expect the same results.

#57 pi2000

pi2000

    The Church of Mouls... er Matthews

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,342 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 January 2016 - 02:07 PM

I just like Kane with Foligno, those two could create some havoc with Larsson. Also, I know it's a bit of a stretch projecting Tkachuk and Fasching into top 6 right away but it happens every year. Duclair and Domi weren't expected to play in the NHL yet but look at them. All I know is that if th e Sabres enter into next year with the same top 6-9 then we can expect the same results.

 

Top 6 isn't the problem.   I look at guys like Fasching, Bailey, Baptiste, Hurley, Karabacek, etc... someday as potential 3rd liners who can contribute offensively.   Guys like Foligno and Larsson belong the 4th line if at all in the NHL. 



#58 WildCard

WildCard

    Gunner's Mate First Class: Philip A$$hole

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,397 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lost in a Supermarket

Posted 27 January 2016 - 02:08 PM

Top 6 isn't the problem. I look at guys like Fasching, Bailey, Baptiste, Hurley, Karabacek, etc... someday as potential 3rd liners who can contribute offensively. Guys like Foligno and Larsson belong the 4th line if at all in the NHL.

Those statements contradict one another


Our top 6 is a huge problem, we only have 3 of them, maybe 4

#59 pi2000

pi2000

    The Church of Mouls... er Matthews

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,342 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 January 2016 - 02:14 PM

Those statements contradict one another


Our top 6 is a huge problem, we only have 3 of them, maybe 4

 

O'Reilly, Kane, Eichel, Reinhart, Ennis, Girgensons

 

who doesn't belong?



#60 Murray's Rats

Murray's Rats

    Since Gilbert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,727 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 27 January 2016 - 02:26 PM

I can see Murray adding between 2-4 forwards and 2-3 defense to next seasons lineup through our prospects, trades, free agency and the draft.

#61 inkman

inkman

    Fledgling Member of TSC

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,678 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairport

Posted 27 January 2016 - 02:26 PM

I can see Murray adding between 2-4 forwards and 2-3 defense to next seasons lineup through our prospects, trades, free agency and the draft.


If he wants this team to be good, he'll need to.

#62 Crusader1969

Crusader1969

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,344 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 02:31 PM

I just like Kane with Foligno, those two could create some havoc with Larsson. Also, I know it's a bit of a stretch projecting Tkachuk and Fasching into top 6 right away but it happens every year. Duclair and Domi weren't expected to play in the NHL yet but look at them. All I know is that if th e Sabres enter into next year with the same top 6-9 then we can expect the same results.

 

Duclair and Domi each spent 2 years after they were drafted in the CHL and were 20 years old before their rookie seasons started. Maybe Tkachuk could play in the NHL next year but its a lot to ask of a 18 year old (not named Eichel) to make that jump.



#63 Murray's Rats

Murray's Rats

    Since Gilbert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,727 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 27 January 2016 - 02:38 PM

Top 6 isn't the problem.   I look at guys like Fasching, Bailey, Baptiste, Hurley, Karabacek, etc... someday as potential 3rd liners who can contribute offensively.   Guys like Foligno and Larsson belong the 4th line if at all in the NHL.

Foligno has played well lately, if he can stay consistent he can be a true power forward and can be deployed in a shut down role. Heck he's been here a while but he's still young. Larsson Deslauriers and Foligno would be a great 4th line but I see a spot for Schaller there starting next year so what to do with Larsson?

If he wants this team to be good, he'll need to.

Pretty much

Duclair and Domi each spent 2 years after they were drafted in the CHL and were 20 years old before their rookie seasons started. Maybe Tkachuk could play in the NHL next year but its a lot to ask of a 18 year old (not named Eichel) to make that jump.

You know more than I do about the young kids, Tkachuk was just a sexy name for my lineup. I'd love a crack at him, Matthews,Puljujarvi or Laine to be honest. Any of em would add instant value IMO

#64 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,790 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 January 2016 - 02:42 PM

O'Reilly, Kane, Eichel, Reinhart, Ennis, Girgensons

who doesn't belong?


On a contending team? Possibly Kane, Ennis, and Girgensons.

If the top-6 wasn't a problem, this team wouldn't be in 29th place. Even teams with merely a competent top-6 and no depth still manage to be fringe playoff teams.

#65 WildCard

WildCard

    Gunner's Mate First Class: Philip A$$hole

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,397 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lost in a Supermarket

Posted 27 January 2016 - 03:21 PM

O'Reilly, Kane, Eichel, Reinhart, Ennis, Girgensons

 

who doesn't belong?

The first 4 belong, with Kane being the maybe. I still think he is a top 6 player, but he's injured frequently, and fairly stupid, so we'll see.


Edited by WildCard, 27 January 2016 - 03:22 PM.


#66 Doohickie

Doohickie

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,483 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 28 January 2016 - 12:22 PM

One question I have:

Are the ROR-Reinhart and Girgs-Eichel combos here to stay?


I certainly hope so, except for brief times when Eich and Samson play together.

#67 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,790 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 February 2016 - 12:23 AM

Let's say fortune smiles and we nab both Yandle and Boedker in UFA, and some get their wish and we keep McGinn, and we draft a Fin. Let's also say that Bylsma is willing to shift Reinhart to center full-time, while wanting to keep his 3rd line as the defensive line.

 

O'Reilly-Eichel-

Boedker-Reinhart-

Kane-Larsson-Gionta (I do love what this line has done this season)

Nobody Cares except for complaining about Moulson wasting cap space

 

Yandle-Ristolainen

McCabe-Pysyk

Gorges-Bogosian (I don't think they'd both be down here, but I hate Bogosian and refuse to slot him above Pysyk on principle)

 

For the forwards we have two RW spots to divide up between Ennis, Girgensons, McGinn, and the Fin. Let's say the Fin stays in Europe, we still have two spots for three players. My first instinct is to put Girgensons with Reinhart and Boedker because that line could use some board work, and Ennis up top, but that really leaves McGinn as the odd man out. Under this scenario, I think a trade is borderline necessary to maximize the roster--either to bolster the D or to get a better fit among the forwards, with Ennis the obvious trade bait. But what if a beneficial trade isn't there to be had? My preferred option at that point would be to shift Gionta to the 4th line, and even though I don't think Bylsma would do such a thing to his captain, I like the way the lines look with that move:

 

O'Reilly-Eichel-Ennis

Boedker-Reinhart-McGinn

Kane-Larsson-Girgensons

Deslauriers-XXX-Gionta

 

That's a forward group I feel pretty good about.



#68 WildCard

WildCard

    Gunner's Mate First Class: Philip A$$hole

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,397 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lost in a Supermarket

Posted 10 February 2016 - 12:27 AM

Great write-up, True. I'll respond in more detail when I focus on this homework and finish it, but a quick glance and I'd much rather switch Girgensons and McGinn. Actually, in order on RW with those lines, I'd like Girgs, Ennis, and McGinn



#69 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,790 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 February 2016 - 12:37 AM

Great write-up, True. I'll respond in more detail when I focus on this homework and finish it, but a quick glance and I'd much rather switch Girgensons and McGinn. Actually, in order on RW with those lines, I'd like Girgs, Ennis, and McGinn

 

If we had a different coach, I'd agree re: McGinn. I just don't think he has the defensive chops to play the 3rd line the way Bylsma uses his 3rd line.



#70 WildCard

WildCard

    Gunner's Mate First Class: Philip A$$hole

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,397 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lost in a Supermarket

Posted 10 February 2016 - 12:47 AM

If we had a different coach, I'd agree re: McGinn. I just don't think he has the defensive chops to play the 3rd line the way Bylsma uses his 3rd line.

He's not who I'm worried about, Zemgus is. He can't play that role either, he's thrived on Eichel's line



#71 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,747 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 10 February 2016 - 12:51 AM

I've been thinking about this a bit, mostly based on the lack of chemistry in Disco Dan's combos.

I think our personnel is screaming for three balanced lines, mostly because Ennis, Kane and Eichel all need to be the guy carrying the puck.

 

What about stable pairs of:

O'Reilly/Eichel

Kane/Reinhart

Ennis/Girgensons

 

Then add Laine and Boedker to go with one of Larsson, Gionta, Foligno, Fasching and Moulson

Mix and match the leftovers with Schaller and Delauriers?



#72 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,790 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 February 2016 - 01:00 AM

He's not who I'm worried about, Zemgus is. He can't play that role either, he's thrived on Eichel's line


And we've come full circle to why I'm not super enthusiastic about keeping McGinn.

#73 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,747 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 10 February 2016 - 01:01 AM

Or what about this?

 

Girgensons Stamkos Ennis

O'Reilly Eichel Laine

Kane Reinhart Fasching/Gionta

Deslauriers Larsson Foligno

 

Hasn't been enough chatter on here about Stamkos, IMO.

We know Murray has asked about him, is tight with Newport Sports, and isn't scared of bold moves

The Sabres have the cap space, a growing rep as an organization that treats players right, and some talented youngsters to play with.

If Stamkos wants to play close to home, we qualify.



#74 WildCard

WildCard

    Gunner's Mate First Class: Philip A$$hole

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,397 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lost in a Supermarket

Posted 10 February 2016 - 01:02 AM

And we've come full circle to why I'm not super enthusiastic about keeping McGinn.

No ######, as soon as I posted that, I knew I shot myself in the foot  :lol:

 

He's a 3rd liner on this team for what we have, and unless he has a short term, the $4+m he'll get we'll be detrimental to the other contracts we need to shell out soon enough 


Or what about this?

 

Girgensons Stamkos Ennis

O'Reilly Eichel Laine

Kane Reinhart Fasching/Gionta

Deslauriers Larsson Foligno

 

Hasn't been enough chatter on here about Stamkos, IMO.

We know Murray has asked about him, is tight with Newport Sports, and isn't scared of bold moves

The Sabres have the cap space, a growing rep as an organization that treats players right, and some talented youngsters to play with.

If Stamkos wants to play close to home, we qualify.

I want 100% nothing to do with Stamkos. Everything from production, to money, to his large presence in the locker room. He's just not a fit here, IMO



#75 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,790 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 February 2016 - 01:04 AM

I've been thinking about this a bit, mostly based on the lack of chemistry in Disco Dan's combos.
I think our personnel is screaming for three balanced lines, mostly because Ennis, Kane and Eichel all need to be the guy carrying the puck.

What about stable pairs of:
O'Reilly/Eichel
Kane/Reinhart
Ennis/Girgensons

Then add Laine and Boedker to go with one of Larsson, Gionta, Foligno, Fasching and Moulson
Mix and match the leftovers with Schaller and Delauriers?

I like where you're going conceptually, and it's something I'd be in favor of. Just don't think it's happening with Bylsma, since it didn't happen when he was in Pittsburgh and he's shown no signs of favoring that approach here. Two other things.

1) I never, ever, want to see Larsson on the wing again. On your proposed 3rd pair, he'd have to center with Girgensons on the wing.

2) Not only do I think Kane has to be the primary puck handler on his line, I think he has to be the top offensive force. Maybe I'll dig them up tomorrow to give specifics, but O'Reilly, Eichel, and Reinhart are all worse offensively when with Kane.

Edited by TrueBlueGED, 10 February 2016 - 01:05 AM.


#76 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,747 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 10 February 2016 - 01:10 AM


I want 100% nothing to do with Stamkos. Everything from production, to money, to his large presence in the locker room. He's just not a fit here, IMO

 

Interesting. On a team that struggles to score, you don't want to add perhaps the best scorer in the league?

I get the value for money argument when you start talking Patrick Kane money, but what if he's available for less?

Why not aim for a cup when Sam, Jack and Risto are all on their bridge or rookie deals?

 

I like where you're going conceptually, and it's something I'd be in favor of. Just don't think it's happening with Bylsma, since it didn't happen when he was in Pittsburgh and he's shown no signs of favoring that approach here. Two other things.

1) I never, ever, want to see Larsson on the wing again. On your proposed 3rd pair, he'd have to center with Girgensons on the wing.

2) Not only do I think Kane has to be the primary puck handler on his line, I think he has to be the top offensive force. Maybe I'll dig them up tomorrow to give specifics, but O'Reilly, Eichel, and Reinhart are all worse offensively when with Kane.

 

1) agreed that Larsson has been much better as a centre, but I think you also have to think about the quality of his linemates making up for that.

2) agree with what you've seen, but I'd like to see more of him with Reinhart before conceding that point.


Edited by dudacek, 10 February 2016 - 01:10 AM.


#77 Randall Flagg

Randall Flagg

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,016 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WNY

Posted 10 February 2016 - 01:17 AM

No ######, as soon as I posted that, I knew I shot myself in the foot  :lol:

 

He's a 3rd liner on this team for what we have, and unless he has a short term, the $4+m he'll get we'll be detrimental to the other contracts we need to shell out soon enough 


I want 100% nothing to do with Stamkos. Everything from production, to money, to his large presence in the locker room. He's just not a fit here, IMO

so like 0% to do with him? 



#78 WildCard

WildCard

    Gunner's Mate First Class: Philip A$$hole

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,397 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lost in a Supermarket

Posted 10 February 2016 - 01:18 AM

Interesting. On a team that struggles to score, you don't want to add perhaps the best scorer in the league?

I get the value for money argument when you start talking Patrick Kane money, but what if he's available for less?

Why not aim for a cup when Sam, Jack and Risto are all on their bridge or rookie deals?

I don't think Stamkos gets us to a Cup, in all honesty. I think we could possibly make a Cup before the ELC's end on Reinhart and Jack, but not with Stamkos. ROR is our leader and our Captain, and Jack and Samson are our future, not Stamkos. Bringing him in is just such a huge message and to me it reads "This is now Stamkos' team" It just wouldn't work, even if we got him for cheap. To me, getting Stamkos would need to be something so absurd I couldn't possibly deny it 


so like 0% to do with him? 

Well, I guess 5%, if he came here at 3X5 or so. 


Edited by WildCard, 10 February 2016 - 01:19 AM.


#79 Randall Flagg

Randall Flagg

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,016 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WNY

Posted 10 February 2016 - 01:21 AM

I don't think Stamkos gets us to a Cup, in all honesty. I think we could possibly make a Cup before the ELC's end on Reinhart and Jack, but not with Stamkos. ROR is our leader and our Captain, and Jack and Samson are our future, not Stamkos. Bringing him in is just such a huge message and to me it reads "This is now Stamkos' team" It just wouldn't work, even if we got him for cheap. To me, getting Stamkos would need to be something so absurd I couldn't possibly deny it 


Well, I guess 5%, if he came here at 3X5 or so. 

I don't want Stamkos for what he'll get, but I definitely can't say that I wouldn't have an erection for the entire 3 years if we got him here 3X5.



#80 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,790 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 February 2016 - 01:24 AM

Interesting. On a team that struggles to score, you don't want to add perhaps the best scorer in the league?
I get the value for money argument when you start talking Patrick Kane money, but what if he's available for less?
Why not aim for a cup when Sam, Jack and Risto are all on their bridge or rookie deals?



1) agreed that Larsson has been much better as a centre, but I think you also have to think about the quality of his linemates making up for that.
2) agree with what you've seen, but I'd like to see more of him with Reinhart before conceding that point.


Totally fair points.

On Stamkos, I've made my case before, but I'll directly address what you said here. On the money, if he were available for less than Kane money I don't see why Tampa would allegedly balk at that price. If he could be had for Tarasenko money I'm listening, I just can't get my head to a spot where that's the case.

As to why I wouldn't gun for a cup when our young stars are cost controlled, I have two reasons:

1) That's only for two more years. I worry that a Stamkos contract cripples our ability to build a complete roster long term because of the lack of back diving contracts, and slowing cap growth. I know not everyone feels this way, but I want a roster structured to compete for 12 years, not one that goes for broke then has to spend 3 years retooling, or worse, stagnates completely a la Pittsburgh.

2) I don't think we're a Stamkos away from winning. Defense and wings have to be addressed in a real way, and unless we can miraculously shed Moulson, Gionta and Gorges this offseason, I don't see how we fit a Stamkos contract and address those other areas AND extend Risto (bridging him would be a colossal blunder IMO). Now, you could certainly argue to get the 40 goal scorer and worry about the rest later without being called crazy. I just fall on the other side of that fence.