Bryan Murray on the team 1200 at 3:05 today.

[Lenny the Lynx]

Tim Murray coming up in the next hour on whatever Lloyd/York's show is called now

 

[General Granny*]

At 10:25

I sent a tweet asking them to ask about Zibby and Petersson.

 

[sg58]

I think everyone involved should get an appreciation thread for nice dodging while talking Zibanejad.

 

[General Granny*]

i think everyone involved should get an appreciation thread for nice dodging while talking zibanejad.

they shut him down!!!

 

[PatrickEaves]

I think everyone involved should get an appreciation thread for nice dodging while talking Zibanejad.

Forget Zib, at least there have been rumors and leaks where he's been concerned. Petersson has been out just about as long as Zib, and there has been zero information about him. He might as well be dead.

 

[Berserker*]

If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, and looks like a duck, and goes by the name "Duck"... chances are it's a duck.

Labrie's one of the worst skaters I can think of (and on a skating team like ours, that's like throwing a hand-grenade into a barrel of frogs: messy). He also takes ar-tard penalties all the goddamned time. He's like a slower Nick Foligno who has 4 goal upside instead of 24 goal upside. And he occasionally challenges the other team's thug to fights. Whoop-de-doo.

Someone mentioned Clutterbuck before, who I'd LOVE to get. Why? Because while he's tough as nails, he can actually PLAY HOCKEY. He's not a liability on the ice. He doesn't need his minutes managed.

Forget the punchers. I don't want ANY "Punchers" on this team. Ever. I want a skilled guy who can also punch if he needs to. Leave the Goons where they belong: in the dustbin. The NHL is going to be goon-free sooner than it is later. Not "fight-free", but goon-free. In 15 years, teams with pure skill-less goons are going to be the Gump Worsley's of the league: desperately hanging on to the old ways despite it being clear how the future is going to play out.

I'd rather not be that one team left "whose goalie refuses to wear a mask".

From what I have seen from Labrie this season, I would have to disagree. He has improved a lot over the last few years and now is actually a pretty effective player on the ice (at least at the AHL level).

In terms of him being a liability, Guy Boucher disagrees and he is a fairly reputable coach.

"What sets him apart from some of the other big, physical guys that you might think are fighters is he plays very smart — very, very smart," Lightning coach Guy Boucher said. "He's never caught out of position. He's very safe, very reliable. He's just not a guy you have at the end of the bench that you put him out there when you need a hit or a fight or whatever. He can play the game."/QUOTE]

http://www.tampabay.com/sports/hockey/lightning/pierre-cedric-labrie-savors-stint-with-tampa-bay-lightning/1212291

Also I have been suggesting him as a 13th forward, who else would you put in that role? You don't want to put a prospect there, they need to be playing.

I still fail to see why adding Labrie to the roster would be a bad idea. Murray mentioned that we likely won't have the luxury of having a "tough guy" on our roster this year. He generally likes to carry a few on the roster so he will likely target some of the tougher players in the off season. When I look at the free agent market I see Labrie as a decent option in terms of a tough guy who can actually play the game.

I think a lot of fans on here are misguided, they are under the impression that Murray is trying to build the Red Wings. That simply isn't true. While he is certainly trying to emulate some aspects of the Detroit system, he is known for having tough guys on his team and pursuing big tough canadian players in the draft an in free agency. Labrie is right up Murray's alley and I see him as an improvement of Konopka's role on the team last season.

I think another thing that a lot of fans are confused about is the concept of being a tough team versus being sufficiently tough. Being a tough team is a leverage able aspect of the game that helps you out compete the opposition, conversely being sufficiently tough means you have just enough toughness to get by. What all GM's want to strive for is to develop the most competitive team they can so they can out compete the opposition to win the Cup. Being a middle of the pack team in goal scoring, defense, depth or goaltending is not what any GM strives for. Toughness fits into that same category, being just tough enough means that you can't use your toughness to help you win games on a regular basis or key games. Being tough was a contributing factor to the success of Boston, Anaheim and LA in their respective cup runs.


The thing that surprises me is that it isn't that hard of a thing to fix and the fans on here are vehemently against it. Having Dziurzynski as the 12th forward and Labrie as the 13th along with having Sdao, Gryba and Boroweicki compete for the 6th and 7th d spot would be enough to start classifying Ottawa as a tough team. Your bottom six and you bottom pairing d men should be tough.

 

[John Holmes*]

I agree, fighting for the sake of fighting is a footnote in the past. I do remember enjoying it quite a bit back in the 90's though, I must admit.

Bob Probert, Link Gaetz, Tie Domi, Stu Grimson...there were some pretty epic fights.

At least Probert and Domi could contribute in other ways.

Look at a guy like Konopka though. He never fought in junior. He had one respectable season as I recall, and seems to have made a conscious decision to turn himself into a fighter in order to make it to the NHL. He wasn't a great fighter, he had barely any skill, but he could win faceoffs. Not a terrible role player as we saw in the playoffs.

Carkner on the other hand, I would classify as a guy that can play enough to warrant an NHL job, just not a real important one. A #7 D. A guy for depth. He wasn't much help to Karlsson when he was watching the game from the pressbox, and his jumping of Boyle could have had disastrous results.

Guys that fight for the sake of fighting used to be a sideshow to the main event, but those days are long gone.

 

[Berserker*]

I agree, fighting for the sake of fighting is a footnote in the past. I do remember enjoying it quite a bit back in the 90's though, I must admit.

Bob Probert, Link Gaetz, Tie Domi, Stu Grimson...there were some pretty epic fights.

At least Probert and Domi could contribute in other ways.

Look at a guy like Konopka though. He never fought in junior. He had one respectable season as I recall, and seems to have made a conscious decision to turn himself into a fighter in order to make it to the NHL. He wasn't a great fighter, he had barely any skill, but he could win faceoffs. Not a terrible role player as we saw in the playoffs.

Carkner on the other hand, I would classify as a guy that can play enough to warrant an NHL job, just not a real important one. A #7 D. A guy for depth. He wasn't much help to Karlsson when he was watching the game from the pressbox, and his jumping of Boyle could have had disastrous results.

Guys that fight for the sake of fighting used to be a sideshow to the main event, but those days are long gone.

That is why now your "tough guys" have to be able to play the game. When I am talking about toughness, fighting is only one aspect of it. IMO the more important aspects are agitating and hitting. Guys that are really nasty to play against in terms of their physical play help teams win important games and help teams win Cups. I would like to see more players like Neil in the lineup, IMO Dziurzynski and Labrie are similar kinds of players and can add to the overall physicality of the team. It is hard to teach players to be very physical if they haven't been doing so their whole career, that is why it is important to have players on the team that being physical and nasty to play against is their style of game.

 

[BK201]

I think everyone involved should get an appreciation thread for nice dodging while talking Zibanejad.

Did they talk about him but not his injury?