Proposal: 2014/2015 Season Trade Rumours and Proposals X - The Trade Shoe Dropped - FALLOUT!
- Thread starter SixthSens
- Start date
- Status
Grigorenko for Prince +. Sens need to grow their own big talented C. Buffalo will get McDavid so may be willing to part w Grigs...next Yashin 2.0
I would honestly rather ennis.
Or even girgensons if they trade for ROR
BonkTastic
ಠ_ಠ
Grigorenko for Prince +. Sens need to grow their own big talented C. Buffalo will get McDavid so may be willing to part w Grigs...next Yashin 2.0
I'd do that yesterday if Buffalo would ever offer it to us.
I'm pretty sure Grigorenko goes the other way in a package if ever the Sabres get O'Reilly or another center. I doubt they would trade down in value since Grigorenko has huge upside. But like you're implying, I doubt they would ever make us an offer like that.
Sun God Nika
Palestine <3.
- Apr 22, 2013
- 19,918
- 8,281
OMG OMG I CAN't WAIIIIT.
That final hour before it closes im just going crazy at all the bodies moving around.
That final hour before it closes im just going crazy at all the bodies moving around.
PeterSidorkiewicz
HFWF Tourney Undisputed Champion
BK201
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 10,815
- 308
Me too, me too.
Sens rumours I read today, we might be looking to trade greening and Condra for draft picks.
Thanks Brennan.
It's really quiet. Probably budget related with the resignings this off season and all.
Secretly I hope we are gonna add a top 6/4 from a cap pressed team. But only next season will I start realizing we were never going to do that.
BonkTastic
ಠ_ಠ
I really like Wiz, but the last thing we need right now is an offensive RHD.
Completely redundant piece.
ReginKarlssonLehner
Let's Win It All
BK201
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 10,815
- 308
lol but then we can trade weircoich and run 3 pairings left side all shutdown D right side all offensive. although i always thing
ceci more two way.
Samsquanch
Raging Bull Squatch
Really? I think that Karl-Wiz-Ceci down the right would be sick.
Get rid of Gryba, or make him the seventh, and run with Meth-Cowen-Boro down the left.
We have Claesson, Englund, Harpur and god forbid Weircoich to play around with on the left in the next coming years. I'd take an upgrade on the right just as willingly as I would on the left.
BonkTastic
ಠ_ಠ
I hate the idea of overloading one side with all offensive guys, and the other with defensive guys.
You want offensive guys on both sides for PP reasons, and defensive guys on both sides for PK reasons. You need to have options on both sides of the ice. Diversify them assets.
DrakeAndJosh
Intangibles
This summer we really need to take advantage of teams in ****** cap situations. The Islanders practically stole Leddy and Boychuck last summer and completely changed their D core because of it. Imagine if we had Leddy and Boychuck instead of two of boro/weircioch/phillips/gryba/cowen?
BonkTastic
ಠ_ಠ
Speaking of Leddy and Boychuk, now that the Isles have given Leddy $5.5/7 years, what is Boychuk's contract going to look like if he re-ups in Long Island/Brooklyn?
Boychuk's contract is going to make Methot's deal look like a bargain, IMO.
Samsquanch
Raging Bull Squatch
I just feel like that's a flawed logic. If it's a good pairing, then really what is the difference?
Like a hypothetical situation where you have 3 pairings of Duncan and Seabrook. Do you think anyone would mind that they play the same roles/sides on each pairing?
No, and there would be no strategic disadvantage to it either.
All 6 dmen we're talking about are all very different players from one another, so aside from the PP getting a little crowded on the right, I'm not opposed to the idea of it at all.
Last edited:
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 53,777
- 30,976
Can't remember who, but one of the TSN guys was saying he'd make north of 6 mil, and Shawn Simpson was saying 7 mil.
Nuts. Somebody is going to be disappointed with that contract imo.
BonkTastic
ಠ_ಠ
I think, more often than not, forcing a defenceman to play his "bad" side will make it a bad pairing.
If a guy who is a righty shot feels ok playing his off side (ie: Gonchar), then that's totally fine. More often than not, that's not the case though. A lot of RD's can't play nearly as effectively on the left side, and vice versa. Defenceman who can play their off-side well exist, but they are exceptions to the rule.
It's not like taking a center and putting him on a wing.
OK,
1) His name is Duncan Keith. That's one guy. Not Duncan (LD) and Keith (RD). I assume you meant Keith & Seabrook? If so,
2) I feel as though this really needs to be said: Duncan Keith is a lefty shot who plays the left side, and Keith Seabrook is a righty shot who plays the right side. I'm not sure what the point of that example was within the context of your argument. Also: three pairings of Keith-Seabrook would be INCREDIBLE.
Last edited:
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 53,777
- 30,976
As a D, you have to be a good skater to play your off side.
If you are right handed playing the left side, and you get the puck in the corner and try to skate it up the ice, the opposition can quickly force you to either make a pass on your backhand or chip it off the boards. You need to be able to skate to open up a lane. If you're on your forehand that's a lot easier.
Samsquanch
Raging Bull Squatch
Edit: damn yes meant Keith-Seabrook. Brainfart....
Well maybe I'm confused, but I was replying to the fact that you were hesitant to have all of your puck movers on the right, and shut down guys on the left.
I'm just trying to understand the disadvantage to having that setup on all 3 pairings.
BonkTastic
ಠ_ಠ
It's not that having that setup on all 3 pairings that is the issue, it's overloading each side with only one type of player is the issue.
A team that has 3 Off.D on one side and 3 Def.D on the other will leave itself vulnerable on:
1) special teams (both PP and PK)
2) leave themselves completely vulnerable at one side of the ice for 60 whole minutes (example: always having a guy who isn't good defensively on the right side would make the team especially weak against elite LWers, who would always have a "weak side" to prey upon). It completely rules out any chance to have a shut-down pairing.
I mean, if you want to have something like this as your three pairings:
Off.D. - Def.D.
Def.D - Off.D.
Off.D - Def.D
... then you still can have the "having an offensive and defensive defenceman on the ice at all times" thing you wanted, but it also gives you the ability to mix up your pairings and change your gameplan up depending on how the game is unfolding, and lets you match up against opponents MUCH better.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 53,777
- 30,976
The problem he stated was wanting to have guys who can play the Right side of the PP and the Left, as well as guys who can play the right side of the PK as well as the left.
Keith and Seabrook are both excellent on the PK. Seabrook has enough offensive tools to play the PP and be effective. Not a good example.
You might not want a lineup of all Krug and Gorges though.
BonkTastic
ಠ_ಠ
Looks like we "missed out" on Sean Bergenheim.
... and by "missed out", I of course mean "dodged a bullet".
... and by "missed out", I of course mean "dodged a bullet".
BK201
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 10,815
- 308
Yeah, I was just joking around. But with Columbus having no RW depth and us having some there could be a match for something.
BonkTastic
ಠ_ಠ
I can't imagine Columbus is expecting to make a late playoff run at this point.
They have a need at RW, but they might wait until the offseason to fill it... especially if we're talking about OUR RW depth. Condra's a pending UFA so he's useless for them, Neil is probably only valued as a playoff guy this season, so again no need for them there.
- Status
