Discussion in 'NHL Draft - Prospects' started by tom_servo, Oct 6, 2003.
TSN.ca and ESPN radio confirm it.
It's tough to find a good babysitter.
All I got to say on this is that pittsburg should put the kid in the ahl. At least a year. Look at what happend to Rick Diepeitro. The guy is a bust because the islenders rushed him to fast and dident get the proper seasoning he should of had in the ahl. Their is still a chance for Rick but Mad mike well probably end up trading him just like he did to luongo and then Rick well be a star with his respected team.
They can't, he's too young.
Now, are they stuck with him since he signed (as I fear) or can they still send him back to Cape Breton?
They can send him back to Cape Breton within 10 games if he implodes.
The Caps sent Eminger back after 17 games.
DiPietro a bust already? I think if you want to talk about NYI and/or goalies being rushed then Fichaud should be mentioned.
He can be sent back at anytime, but after he hits his 10 game limit, he must be paid for the entire season...
I hope they do send him to the AHL. Playing with a team as bad as the pens, con't do anything good for the kids confidence. It would be different with a forward, who could shine on a weak team, but with a goalie, confidence can make him or break him
Dipietro is certainly not a bust. Blackburn is a more apt comparison. Both he and Fleury were too good for their respective leagues both could use better competition. Blackburn's faired well. Really you can't say anything about him unless you've seen him play. I'd say the only draw back for him is he has not been able to build up any endurance but I think Fleury will get much more games then he did.
you can send a player to junior/minor any time. it's just that if you send the player back after the player played more than 10 games it will trigger as the first year of the contract and count as the first year of the 3 years waiver exampt.
Like I said a little higher, they can't.
Ah. Thanx for the information. But if they do send him back to the Q, the contract's first year is postponed to 2004-2005? If it does, it sure appears to me like the way to handle things for now on (on the other hand, it doesn't seem too good for the Pens if Fleury's value for whatever reason gets down this year and they're stuck with an untouched 3-year deal).
if they send him back to the Q (this year) before he played his 11th NHL game (this year). he will need to fulfill 3 more professional years. starting from:
#1, when he loses his Jr eligibility
#2, when he first plays 11 or more NHL games in a season.
I don't think Blackburn is a very good example of how to deal with a goalie prospect. The guy was brought into the NHL as a backup goalie and played relatively well. Since then he has struggled with inconsistency and now he is buried behind Dunham and Markkanen. There's no reason why you should break in a goalie at 18 only to send him to the AHL when he's 21. What is the harm in letting him play out his eligibility? It never hurt Brodeur, Lalime, Theodore, etc.
Why do you want to subject your prized goaltending prospect to what will probably be a long and unfruitful season when he can hone the finer aspects of his game away from the spotlight in the Q?
If you're Pittsburgh and you have severe financial problems, what's the point in rushing a goalie when you have other capable goalies under contract when he won't contribute too much?
This is why I say you need to watch him play and be around this team to get an idea. Please get your facts straight, he's not "burried" behind Dunham and Markkanen. Markkanen was brought in so Blackburn could be sent down and develop endurance. The short time he had the starting job last year he tired down quickly after a fantastic 8 game stretch. It is apperant he needs to build up his stamina if he wants to start in the NHL. He has only played in 35 games each of his 2 seasons as a backup, that is the difference between him and the ones you named. They were starters since day one. He's still only 20 years old so it's not like this will hurt him.
THE ONLY PROBLEM WITH BLACKBURN IS ENDURANCE, THE ONLY WAY TO BUILD ENDURANCE IS BY HAVING HIM START 50-60 GAMES. THE ONLY WAY THAT WILL HAPPEN IS IF HE PLAYS IN THE AHL.
*no I'm not yelling, just want to make it clear to people who are obviously not in tuned with the Rangers*
He has been inconsistent but all rookies and young players are so what's the difference, do you expect MA Fleury to be great 70% of the time?
You build endurance in the weight room, and on a stationary bike.
Anyone will tell you that weight room and the bike don't replace game time. Also, I'll guarantee that thugs like Jim McKenzie, Wade Belak, etc. would die if they had to play every night for 20 minutes a game on a repeated basis and they never shied away from the weights.
I assume you've never played this game of hockey?
Only since I was 6.
So you agree with the statement that the only way to build endurance is on the ice?
Thanks for replying like an idiot. By the same token I can ask if you agree with the statement 'so you agree that the only way to build endurance is in the weight room and on the bike.' Think for a moment. It's a combo of the two. Next time I'll be sure to give you the phonics version.
I never used the word "only", Copernicus. Try harder.
Neither did I Darwin. I guess I really do need to provide the phonics version of my posts for you.
And it's a good thing, too, because I was responding to #37-#93-#27.
I then asked if you agreed with the above statement.
Are we up to speed now?
And I'm replying to Post number 20, where you quoted me, not #37-#93-#27. And you did use only. Make up your mind who your talking too. Your just looking like someone stirring up $hit. Oh wait, that is you though