Mighty Makar
I hate this fu*ken team
- May 24, 2016
- 14,685
- 15,892
Prospect Info: Cale Makar - D [4th Overall]
- Thread starter LastWordArmy
- Start date
- Status
- Apr 25, 2006
- 49,532
- 52,636
Maybe Regehr, but still. This organization.
Neither Regehr nor Shatty nor Boychuk were true #1 dmen. Heck, even Foote, while elite in his style of play, was more of a #2 than a #1.
Alex Jones
BIG BOWL 'A CHILI!!
That argument that Foote was not a number one is totally wrong. Today a player with his skillset could never be a #1, but in the 90s he was a prototype NHL defender
- Feb 24, 2012
- 62,869
- 47,000
Foote wasn't ever a big point producer, but he was elite defensively and the perfect defensemen for his era. Vlasic and Foote are not similar in size, but in being in the elite defensive category and fitting their role (in their era) perfectly... they are similar. If you think Vlasic is a #1, then Foote was. If you don't, then I can see why a person doesn't think Foote was.
IMO Foote's biggest issue offensively was more around that once he started to get some age, he just couldn't stay healthy. Even when he played, he was far from 100%
IMO Foote's biggest issue offensively was more around that once he started to get some age, he just couldn't stay healthy. Even when he played, he was far from 100%
- Apr 25, 2006
- 49,532
- 52,636
He was a minute muncher and a D-zone specialist like Vlasic. Foote was still averaging 25 min a game when Blake was here and the team's true #1.
#1's back then were good defensively and offensively too...like Blake, Chelios, Lidstrom, Bourque, Pronger...it's not true to say that Foote was the prototype for a #1 defenseman in the 90's.
- Feb 24, 2012
- 62,869
- 47,000
I'm not saying there were not good offensive #1D, but saying if you believe a player like Vlasic is a #1D, then Foote was the same in his era.
Actually his offensive numbers got better as he got older. He was a pure shutdown bruiser to start out his career, but after double shoulder surgery (forget the year but it was late nineties) he changed his game, became a better, smarter player. He took opportunities to move the puck up-ice, which he was actually surprisingly good at. His best offensive season was at or around age 32 in 2002-03 (11-20-31...that's pretty good, especially in the Dead Puck era).
His biggest issues offensively were that he wasn't an outlet passer and didn't really possess a powerful shot. It wasn't Rod Langway's "cool summer breeze" but it wasn't exactly a cannon either. I also don't remember him cheating in from the point or joining the cycle when in the attacking zone.
- Feb 24, 2012
- 62,869
- 47,000
That follows my point. Look at the years prior too, he was producing at a good pace, he just couldn't stay healthy in a number of years and that limited his bigger seasons. He never played a sexy offensive game, but it was pretty effective for the dead puck era.
For some reason I had it in my head Miro Heiskanen was fairly big. Like, not gigantic or anything, but around 6'1" thereabouts. I guess he's taller than Makar but listed weight is less.
agentblack
Registered User
It's not that bad, Nashville only developed Hamhuis, Weber, Suter, Josi. We can ignore those scrubs like Ekholm, Ellis, and Jones
- Apr 25, 2006
- 49,532
- 52,636
To me the most surprising thing looking back at the combine is that Liljegren and Makar are identical in height and almost identical in weight as well. Thought Liljegren was taller, he isn't.
Heiskanen: 6'0.75" 172 lbs
Makar: 5'11.25" 187 lbs
Liljegren: 5'11.25" 190 lbs
But yeah, Heiskanen needs to add muscles.
Tommy Shelby
Registered User
- Feb 26, 2012
- 7,462
- 4,847
No need to draft one of those when you have so many top-4 D to easily trade for one, unlike our bass ackwards team that tires to trade #1Cs for #1ds.
agentblack
Registered User
No need to draft one of those when you have so many top-4 D to easily trade for one, unlike our bass ackwards team that tires to trade #1Cs for #1ds.
Sign of the times, if this were the 80s and 90s you could do that
McMetal
Writer of Wrongs
- Sep 29, 2015
- 14,157
- 12,171
No need to draft one of those when you have so many top-4 D to easily trade for one, unlike our bass ackwards team that tires to trade #1Cs for #1ds.
You're forgetting that there are two sides to every trade. If you can easily trade 1Ds for 1Cs, then that must mean it's just as easy to trade 1Cs for 1Ds. Where do you think all of these numerous 1Cs come from if not other teams?
If it's easy to trade a 1D for a 1C then that implies 1D has more value, otherwise it wouldn't be so easy. And if 1D has more value then it's going to be hard to trade a 1C for a more valuable 1D.
McMetal
Writer of Wrongs
- Sep 29, 2015
- 14,157
- 12,171
Again, like I said, there are two sides to every trade. If you have a 1D and trade him for a 1C, that MUST mean that some other GM traded a 1C for a 1D.
McMetal
Writer of Wrongs
- Sep 29, 2015
- 14,157
- 12,171
Oh I see. You just take your defenseman to the forward store, trade him in for a fresh, never used first line center, and then your D gets sent back to the defenseman farm.
- Aug 25, 2006
- 9,382
- 7,503
McMetal could be right with this statement.
But he is certainly right with this one.
In the first one you guys are talking value. Keeping in mind that most people give the 1D a bit more value then trading a 1D for a 1C might be easier than the other way around.
In the second post McMetal talks about trading one for the other regardless of value therefore if you trade one 1D for one 1C than it is the outcome is the same as the other way around.
But he is certainly right with this one.
In the first one you guys are talking value. Keeping in mind that most people give the 1D a bit more value then trading a 1D for a 1C might be easier than the other way around.
In the second post McMetal talks about trading one for the other regardless of value therefore if you trade one 1D for one 1C than it is the outcome is the same as the other way around.
ASmileyFace
Landeskog Replacement
I know this is in the Prospects thread but I think it deserves to be here too. Hype.
- Oct 24, 2008
- 22,679
- 30,612
linusandvarlamov
GO AVS GO !
They also added a couple of plays where he's dangling all over the rink : just as impressive as the goal he scored in the video above.
This kid is going to be such a stud. I'm actually happy we didn't get #1 or #2 at the draft in 17.
This kid is going to be such a stud. I'm actually happy we didn't get #1 or #2 at the draft in 17.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
First round has been terrible, but next round will benefit
- Latest: thaman8765678
Upcoming events
-
-
Series Winner Dallas Stars vs Vegas Golden Knights - Series tied 2-2Wagers: 7Staked: $3,187.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 5 Vegas Golden Knights @ Dallas Stars - Series tied 2-2Wagers: 7Staked: $2,202.00Event closes
- Updated:
-
Game 5 Los Angeles Kings @ Edmonton Oilers - Edmonton leads series 3-1Wagers: 5Staked: $5,924.00Event closes
- Updated:
-
Series Winner Boston Bruins vs Toronto Maple LeafsWagers: 1Staked: $10,000.00Event closes
- Updated: