Toggle sidebar

Salary Cap: 2017-18 Roster Building Thread VI | Contract/FA charts in Post #1 | CAP SET at $75M

Status
Not open for further replies.
JimmyTwoTimes

JimmyTwoTimes

Registered User
Apr 13, 2010
19,958
5,281
Beauner said:
I still don't know why that deal was made. He was decent depth and I believe we still could've added hainsey and streit.
Click to expand...

Don't know either. Good lockeroom guy. Didn't have to play him anyways , could have been a HS. Would have liked to see him get another cup.

I could see if we needed the money
 

Peat

Registered User
Jun 14, 2016
29,522
25,377
JimmyTwoTimes said:
Don't know either. Good lockeroom guy. Didn't have to play him anyways , could have been a HS. Would have liked to see him get another cup.

I could see if we needed the money
Click to expand...

Well we got Corrado back too. Fehr for free and Corrado for the 4th?

It's been said somewhere that the main reason Fehr moved is he wanted to be moved.
 
Riptide

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
Beauner said:
I still don't know why that deal was made. He was decent depth and I believe we still could've added hainsey and streit.
Click to expand...

For starters he was unhappy with his role and had been for a while, and Rutherford had been trying to move him for a while.
 
Beauner

Beauner

Registered User
Jun 14, 2011
13,033
6,133
Pittsburgh
If he wanted to go then that's understandable. Also Corrado does absolutely nothing for me.

Watching the All Access where Dumo and Daley "poured one out" for Fehr was kinda funny though
 
SEALBound

SEALBound

Fancy Gina Carano
Sponsor
Jun 13, 2010
40,548
18,713
Riptide said:
OMG that was priceless.
Click to expand...

Surprised Jersey or Philly fans haven't come out and said "Is the team that gets the 1OV in a draft the real winners of the season?" :laugh:

Riptide said:
2 went for Hainsey and 4 went for Streit. We still have our 3rd. And we have an extra 5th.
Click to expand...

Riptide said:
**** you're right. The 2017 4th was given to Toronto to take Fehr.
Click to expand...

Was just about to make that clarification. We did get Corrado back from Toronto though. He's about what you hope a 4th rounder turns into so...

Riptide said:
For starters he was unhappy with his role and had been for a while, and Rutherford had been trying to move him for a while.
Click to expand...

He was. He was told he was coming to be the 3C which was never true IMHO. We traded for Bonino before we signed Fehr so...not sure what he thought he role was gonna be. I thought he role was exactly what he was for us - 3rd/4th line wing who can be a fill in center. He just got lost in relevancy here. He wasn't skilled nor speedy, he wasn't a defensive/PK stalwart, he was big but wasn't an overly physical guy who would stand up for teammates if needed. Good at all things, great at nothing.

I appreciated his time here but at $2mil, he just wasn't a need.
 
Riptide

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
SEALBound said:
He was. He was told he was coming to be the 3C which was never true IMHO. We traded for Bonino before we signed Fehr so...not sure what he thought he role was gonna be. I thought he role was exactly what he was for us - 3rd/4th line wing who can be a fill in center. He just got lost in relevancy here. He wasn't skilled nor speedy, he wasn't a defensive/PK stalwart, he was big but wasn't an overly physical guy who would stand up for teammates if needed. Good at all things, great at nothing.

I appreciated his time here but at $2mil, he just wasn't a need.
Click to expand...

The funny thing? Right now where things stand with our C depth... I kinda wish we had him back.
 
Riptide

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
leopold stotch said:
Interesting thought you brought up. Could Fehr produce at 3rd nearly as well as Bonino? He always said C was his best position.
Click to expand...

The issue with Fehr as a #3C is that the line wouldn't be offensive at all. It reminds me of a scaled back version of the Ducks 3rd line in 2006 with Moen and Pahlsson. If you want a 3rd line that can score and sustain the attack... I don't see how Fehr is going to help there.

And while Rowney and Sundqvist are not proven at all, I think between the two of them we'll be fine for a #4C next season. Which means while Fehr would help shore up our weak C depth... the only appealing thing about him is that he's a C, and even that disappears the second we secure a better C to fill the #3C spot (Bonino, FA, trade).
 
AjaxTelamon

AjaxTelamon

Registered User
Jul 8, 2011
6,070
1,825
UnderratedBrooks44 said:
Fehr was part of clearing some cap to make other moves that never actually happened I think. Plus he was awful at the time and we could afford to lose him and his salary.
Click to expand...

He wasn't awful, he had actually looked pretty good at C prior to the deal. And yeah, we could use him now, depending on if JR can address the C position. But we wouldn't have had to give up assets for Fehr.
 
AjaxTelamon

AjaxTelamon

Registered User
Jul 8, 2011
6,070
1,825
Riptide said:
The issue with Fehr as a #3C is that the line wouldn't be offensive at all. It reminds me of a scaled back version of the Ducks 3rd line in 2006 with Moen and Pahlsson. If you want a 3rd line that can score and sustain the attack... I don't see how Fehr is going to help there.

And while Rowney and Sundqvist are not proven at all, I think between the two of them we'll be fine for a #4C next season. Which means while Fehr would help shore up our weak C depth... the only appealing thing about him is that he's a C, and even that disappears the second we secure a better C to fill the #3C spot (Bonino, FA, trade).
Click to expand...

Having Fehr would mean we weren't forced to address it now if the deal isn't there. At this point, we can't really go in to the season with what we have under contract. We could have if Fehr was here.
 

seabs926

Registered User
Jun 14, 2009
237
32
Aiastelmon said:
Having Fehr would mean we weren't forced to address it now if the deal isn't there. At this point, we can't really go in to the season with what we have under contract. We could have if Fehr was here.
Click to expand...
Eric Fehr, assuming full season, is a 20 point player now. Having him here would have not made a lick of difference in how aggressive we are in getting a 3C.
 
UnderratedBrooks44

UnderratedBrooks44

Registered User
Sep 13, 2005
17,564
315
Miranda's house
Aiastelmon said:
He wasn't awful, he had actually looked pretty good at C prior to the deal. And yeah, we could use him now, depending on if JR can address the C position. But we wouldn't have had to give up assets for Fehr.
Click to expand...

Yes, he was awful at wing and we had better centers even if he looked good there one game. He was viewed as expendable most of the year. I know it seems like forever ago but that happened. Even if he would've been a serviceable center, I don't want to pay $2 million for a 4C anyways so I'm not going to sweat it too much and again, it was to clear room to hopefully make a larger deal. We also had much cheaper options that performed well up here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom