- Feb 24, 2012
- 61,916
- 45,268
Do we win the '96 cup without Claude Lemieux? Is that a fair comparison for Downie?
Not a fair comparison at all. Lemieux was a way better player, bigger, and one of the best playoff performers of his generation.
Do we win the '96 cup without Claude Lemieux? Is that a fair comparison for Downie?
Do we win the '96 cup without Claude Lemieux? Is that a fair comparison for Downie?
I understand what your saying about the Talbot being a key piece, and I agree. He's got the cup experience, and I can see what he brings to the table. I just wish we could have gotten a draft pick in addition to Talbot to even it out a little. I feel like we got bent over a little in this one.
Hope your right about Radulov. Would love to get him in the lineup.
Do we win the '96 cup without Claude Lemieux? Is that a fair comparison for Downie?
I think you're right. That was the likely the mindset.
The question is can Talbot get to that level, and have the kind of impact Keane v1 and Podes had on their cup teams. Hopefully he can, and maybe the playoffs will bring that out in him, but he's not off to a great start. Keane and Podein weren't necessarily high scoring players but they were very effective on the forecheck, and at chipping in offensively. Talbot has struggled doing much of anything past his own blue line, and has not been particularly good on the forecheck.
Hopefully he can get better as he learns the west, and learns Roy's system better.
Obviously in terms of on-ice production, Lemieux and Downie don't compare. I meant more as an agitator with a dose of crazy who can really get under the skin of opponents while still playing a top six role. You don't necessarily need to replace everything that Lemieux brought with one player, but it seems like some aspects of his role with the '96 Avs team is comparable to what Downie provided for us. When we traded for Downie, it was said that every team needs a player of his ilk - you can't be soft. And while the Avs of the past were not a soft team, Lemieux brought a level of toughness that benefitted them. I do think this team misses Downie's passion. But I think it misses his toughness even more.
One of the things Downie does poorly as an agitator is that he himself is the guy who usually lets stuff get under his skin. Lemieux was an agitator, no doubt, but he very rarely lost his temper out there. Again, I just don't think it's a good comparison. If you want to compare Downie to a player on that team, you should be aiming squarely at Chris Simon. Simon was a guy who could play on a scoring line, pot some goals, and was plenty tough. He also took his fair share of dumb penalties.
I don't think this team misses Downie's toughness at all. There's plenty of grit on this roster--they're by no means a soft team up front without Downie. Keep in mind the offense more or less dried up after Tanguay went down and Parenteau went cold, not when Downie was traded.
However, since you brought up Lemieux, one thing he did the Avs could sorely use is a guy who can pot the ugly goals up close. Lemieux could take punishment in the slot and still get to the loose puck and pot it in. We could use a guy like that, especially on the power play.
Wait what do you mean by this? That Philly will willingly give us a lopsided deal because they "owe us one" for winning this trade?
No just that building up some good will with another GM can go a long way if and when the time comes for another move.
While maybe Roy could have forced a 3rd out of Homer, it is not a huge loss to take if Roy got his guy and opened that door for later. I'm pretty sure a few GMs/front office people have stated that there is a Gm or two they feel is very hard to work with in trading. One of the NY teams comes to mind. Maybe if Homer decides to move Coburn, he gives Roy a courtesy call first before advertizing Coburn's availability.
Just like having a good connection at the car dealership, sometimes you get a shot at a car before it even hits the lot, and often for less than what would have been asked.
Good game for Talbot tonight. Had a few giveaways early and then kept it simple and good things happened.
Looked good for the first time in Avs colors tonight. Hope he keeps it up
So wait it took Talbot around 10 games to get it going offensively after getting used to a new team and a new system? Huh, who would have thought.
So wait it took Talbot around 10 games to get it going offensively after getting used to a new team and a new system? Huh, who would have thought.
I have no doubt that Talbot will generally be useless offensively, the problem in the first few games was that he wasn't forechecking effectively, getting pucks deep, or helping to maintain possession. If he does those things I'm all good
We must've been watching different players then. He's been forechecking like crazy most times I've seen him and pinning guys on the boards behind the net, and chipping it in. It sounds like you're describing a perimeter player, and he most certainly hasn't been that. I don't know if a player of his type drives possession all that well, but he's been doing exactly what the Avs got him to do.
Admittedly I didn't watch the Florida game at all.
This trade seems worse with every game I watch Talbot play. Don't like the guy at all
Good game for Talbot tonight. Had a few giveaways early and then kept it simple and good things happened.
Flyers fan here and I come in peace. Glad to see Max doing well for you. Steve has fit in really well here on the 3rd line with Sean and Matt. That line has really been playing well. Glad to see the deal worked for both teams. Good luck.