News Article: Who We Might Lose to Waivers

[Jester9881]

I do not see any benefit in sitting guys like Lee, Martin, Cizikas, Donovan etc.... guys that are still young with upside should be playing every day in BP if not the NHL. Let players like Boulton, Conacher, Strait and Carkner be the depth.

 

[Tampacuseforever]

I do not see any benefit in sitting guys like Lee, Martin, Cizikas, Donovan etc.... guys that are still young with upside should be playing every day in BP if not the NHL. Let players like Boulton, Conacher, Strait and Carkner be the depth.

Thank you that's my point

 

[Sparksrus3]

I like that we now have a thread discussing who we might lose to waivers and not who we might pick up

Nominee for the most positive post of this calendar year!

 

[Banana Sandwiches]

As an outside observer who watched a good number of Islanders games last year, I don't understand the dislike for Eric Boulton.

He played well last year (from what I saw. Also, look at the player of the game thread from last season in this board), he's one of the few veterans on here, and seems to be well respected and liked by a lot of his teammates (important teammates too like Tavares and Okposo).

The cap hit isn't a problem as it's minuscule. It would be a waste to replace Boulton with someone with a skilled guy from Bridgeport just to have him play on the 4th line.

 

[13th Floor]

As an outside observer who watched a good number of Islanders games last year, I don't understand the dislike for Eric Boulton.

He played well last year (from what I saw. Also, look at the player of the game thread from last season in this board), he's one of the few veterans on here, and seems to be well respected and liked by a lot of his teammates (important teammates too like Tavares and Okposo).

The cap hit isn't a problem as it's minuscule. It would be a waste to replace Boulton with someone with a skilled guy from Bridgeport just to have him play on the 4th line.

Because it is still a roster spot. If he plays down in Bridgeport most of the time, sure. But if we are carrying 14 forwards, I don't see why Boulton should get that spot, travel with the team, and be subbed in occasionally to play 6:30 a game.

This is who could make this team as forward:
Tavares, Okposo, Strome, Nelson, Lee, Nielsen, Grabo, Grabner, Kulemin, Clutterbuck, Martin, Cizikas, McDonald, Skille, Sundstrom, Gillies, Conacher

That's 17 players. If he beats enough out to make the 14 because he's playing that well, then sure. But to keep him on in place of one of those hockey players just for slugfests, then I think we are icing a team that the NHL style is moving away from.

Of the elite teams, where is a player like Boulton? Maybe he played well because we were bad. Now we have depth, and should be emulating the teams that have success in this league, most of which do not employ a player like Boulton. It's like the advice they give to parents: don't raise your kids the way you were raised, because they aren't growing up in the world that you grew up in. Things are different in the NHL now, and we finally have depth to have hockey players up and down the lineup. I simply think there isn't room for him.

 

[KasparsHipCheck]

I would not be sad to see Carkner go--but who would take him, I do not know? I think we are absolutely stuck with him, given his inflated salary. I could see Strait or even Brennan not making it through (especially Brennan). I'd prefer not have had resigned Carkner--the idea is that fighting in getting to be obsolete and Carkner has no other role on the team. I do not like the Defensive core talent that we are trying to develop, having this guy out there as a playing partner. He can not skate and is prone to far to many moments that make you want to slap yourself across the face for not turning the tv off when it's announced he's in the line-up for the night.
I believe if it is necessary to care a heavyweight--a 4th line winger is less of a liability, especially for this defensively fragile team.
Other than that I'm glad ownership and Snow finally feel some heat under their butts to produce a team that is legitimately a playoff contender. I personally will not be happy with anything less this year--with a healthy (and lean) John Tavares, a confident K.O., a Grabner who converts on a few more of those breakaways (last year was an off one for him), and Frans playing a solid respectable role on 3rd line where he feels comfortable.

I'm really dying for the season to start...enough with the countdown...just drop the puck. Let's GO!!!

 

[Jester9881]

As an outside observer who watched a good number of Islanders games last year, I don't understand the dislike for Eric Boulton.

He played well last year (from what I saw. Also, look at the player of the game thread from last season in this board), he's one of the few veterans on here, and seems to be well respected and liked by a lot of his teammates (important teammates too like Tavares and Okposo).

The cap hit isn't a problem as it's minuscule. It would be a waste to replace Boulton with someone with a skilled guy from Bridgeport just to have him play on the 4th line.

There's a large contingent of posters here that don't consider the intangibles players like Boulton bring as being important. There's also a large contingent of posters here with gold fish memories that forget what it was like before we had Boulton and Carkner..... and consequently, forget why those guys were brought here in the first place.

 

[13th Floor]

There's a large contingent of posters here that don't consider the intangibles players like Boulton bring as being important. There's also a large contingent of posters here with gold fish memories that forget what it was like before we had Boulton and Carkner..... and consequently, forget why those guys were brought here in the first place.

If he is so important, why are we all so positive that he would clear waivers? Where is this player on the Kings and Blackhawks? Rack your brain through the Kings forwards and remember who is SO tough. Dwight King I guess? They just ALL play rough and rumble hockey. It's TEAM toughness. Brown, Stoll, etc. You need to replace that with people like Clutterbuck, who have an element of hockey to them. If we dressed Boulton against the Kings, none of those dudes would fight him. So what's the point?

Remember when Okposo got pissed enough to knock Niskanen on his ass? That's what you need. That wins championships. Yes, we have a smaller team, but so does Montreal. They didn't knuckle drag their way to the ECF. If we want to play mutant league hockey and beat the crap out of people because we get no respect because we suck AGAIN, then yea, dress him. I'm hoping we move away from that.

 

[A Pointed Stick]

There's a large contingent of posters here that don't consider the intangibles players like Boulton bring as being important. There's also a large contingent of posters here with gold fish memories that forget what it was like before we had Boulton and Carkner..... and consequently, forget why those guys were brought here in the first place.

I half agree. I like Boulton for what he brings as he has more skill than most of the heavyweights. Carkner... I never liked having a defensive spot filled by a McSorley type, though McSorley himself was an actual defenseman. What's worse, shortening your bench by 1 defenseman when you only have 6 to begin with because he got a minor or more, or, having a guy play 15 minutes on defense who can no longer play defense competently? IMO, it has always been a losing proposition. Hamonic's first two years he fought too many times for a top 4 defenseman. I would rather sacrifice another bottom 6 forward spot for another enforcer than have Carkner in there at this point of his career.

 

[Jester9881]

If he is so important, why are we all so positive that he would clear waivers?

Wait a minute... so a handful of people have a fantasy, and that makes it reality? You THINK he would clear waivers. Maybe he does, I'm not about to make definitive claims like that either way.... but that does not change the fact that players like him still play an important role in the NHL.

Where is this player on the Kings and Blackhawks?

For LA, Kyle Clifford, before him it was Kevin Westgarth. For Chicago there's Brandon Bollig, before him it was John Scott. You might counter with the amount of fights they got into, I'd then ask what else they bring to the table that Boulton doesn't? You might also bring up the amount of games they played, I'd respond by saying "my point exactly".

Remember when Okposo got pissed enough to knock Niskanen on his ass? That's what you need. That wins championships. Yes, we have a smaller team, but so does Montreal. They didn't knuckle drag their way to the ECF. If we want to play mutant league hockey and beat the crap out of people because we get no respect because we suck AGAIN, then yea, dress him. I'm hoping we move away from that.

Montreal is paying Prust a pretty penny to play the same role Boulton plays for us....

There you anti-fighting guys go again.... bringing up the NISKANEN fight again. Listen to yourself..... if NISKANEN was the biggest threat out there, I'd agree with you nut bars that guys like Boulton aren't needed. Unlike the lot of you though, I remember Kaleta and Scott taking runs at Tavares and Nielsen unimpeded and unpenalized.

Rack YOUR brain.... it was only a few years ago, and the main reason Carkner and Boulton were brought in to begin with.

 

[Jester9881]

I half agree. I like Boulton for what he brings as he has more skill than most of the heavyweights. Carkner... I never liked having a defensive spot filled by a McSorley type, though McSorley himself was an actual defenseman. What's worse, shortening your bench by 1 defenseman when you only have 6 to begin with because he got a minor or more, or, having a guy play 15 minutes on defense who can no longer play defense competently? IMO, it has always been a losing proposition. Hamonic's first two years he fought too many times for a top 4 defenseman. I would rather sacrifice another bottom 6 forward spot for another enforcer than have Carkner in there at this point of his career.

Lets be honest here, the drop off in talent from a guy like Strait to Carkner isn't exactly that large. And having a heavy on D, gives you the option of having protection out there for a guy like Tavares without juggling the lines. It's a big reason the Penguins valued Engelland for so long, and Washington still values Erskine. They may not play as many minutes as say Strait.... but what is worse?

Carkner for 8mins a night with Hamonic/Visnovsky picking up the slack?

Or Hamonic/Visnovsky getting regular playing time with Strait getting 15mins a night?

I'd personally take option one, granted neither is very appealing.

 

[13th Floor]

Wait a minute... so a handful of people have a fantasy, and that makes it reality? You THINK he would clear waivers. Maybe he does, I'm not about to make definitive claims like that either way.... but that does not change the fact that players like him still play an important role in the NHL.



For LA, Kyle Clifford, before him it was Kevin Westgarth. For Chicago there's Brandon Bollig, before him it was John Scott. You might counter with the amount of fights they got into, I'd then ask what else they bring to the table that Boulton doesn't? You might also bring up the amount of games they played, I'd respond by saying "my point exactly".



Montreal is paying Prust a pretty penny to play the same role Boulton plays for us....

There you anti-fighting guys go again.... bringing up the NISKANEN fight again. Listen to yourself..... if NISKANEN was the biggest threat out there, I'd agree with you nut bars that guys like Boulton aren't needed. Unlike the lot of you though, I remember Kaleta and Scott taking runs at Tavares and Nielsen unimpeded and unpenalized.

Rack YOUR brain.... it was only a few years ago, and the main reason Carkner and Boulton were brought in to begin with.

I get your points, Jester, as they are fair. And maybe I am a "nut bar".

Also, it's somewhat insulting to paint me as anti-fighting. I think that just fits me into a bucket that you can easily kick. I'm not anti-fighting. I'm just aware of the changes happening in the game. Fighting will be gone in a decade - it is what it is. It's better to put big players in your lineup who can play hockey.

Prust is a far superior player to Eric Boulton. Clifford played almost every game at 10 minutes a game. Could Boulton be that effective in that role on the Kings? If he can, then I eat crow. But if the Isles are going to use him to play every 4th game for 6 minutes, then I think I'd rather see someone else with that spot. The spots are finite.

I'm happy we're arguing about 4th liners, though. It at least FEELs a bit different around here.

 

[Jester9881]

I get your points, Jester, as they are fair. And maybe I am a "nut bar".

Also, it's somewhat insulting to paint me as anti-fighting. I think that just fits me into a bucket that you can easily kick.

Sorry for going a bit over the top.

I'm not anti-fighting. I'm just aware of the changes happening in the game. Fighting will be gone in a decade - it is what it is. It's better to put big players in your lineup who can play hockey.

When the time comes, I'm all for it.... until then though, I'd rather not put all our young up and comers in danger of career ending injuries.

Prust is a far superior player to Eric Boulton.

He'd better be.... he's getting payed a whole lot more! More money.... to play the same role.... which was my point.

Clifford played almost every game at 10 minutes a game. Could Boulton be that effective in that role on the Kings? If he can, then I eat crow. But if the Isles are going to use him to play every 4th game for 6 minutes, then I think I'd rather see someone else with that spot. The spots are finite.

Clifford had 8 points in 71 games. Boulton had 4 in 23.

Is Clifford that superior in all other facets of the game? Not in my opinion.... and Boulton is a big leader in that room despite what many think. The fact that LA had Clifford playing 3X the amount of games just proves my point IMO. They feel what he brings is important enough to keep on the roster night in night out.

I'm happy we're arguing about 4th liners, though. It at least FEELs a bit different around here.

Ditto

 

[PK Cronin]

Is Clifford that superior in all other facets of the game? Not in my opinion.... and Boulton is a big leader in that room despite what many think. The fact that LA had Clifford playing 3X the amount of games just proves my point IMO. They feel what he brings is important enough to keep on the roster night in night out.

I don't think that proves your point exactly. Clifford could be more defensively responsible and less of a liability when he's out there, making it easier to keep him in the lineup.

Boulton is really just a 'meh' player, who only is going to be given a chance to do one thing. I'm not big on guys who only do one thing, but I could see the importance. I'd rather carry Boulton than Carkner honestly, but I don't think there's a huge need for them anymore. The kids they were protecting aren't kids anymore.

While I think your point about Niskanen is true, it's also true that having players respond on their own does a lot more in the effort to protect players and the team than selecting goons to handle your business. The Kings are a big tough team, because everyone on that team is scrappy and willing to stick up for one another (sans Gaborik probably). The Bruines are a big tough team, because everyone on that team is scrappy and willing to stick up for one another. That's what protects your players more than anything else, that us against the world mentality, when the other team knows they better not cross the line or the team will respond in kind.

The only time I see the need to dress Carkner, Boulton, and Martin on the same night is if we're playing a team who is literally comprised of all goons (I'm looking at you Calgary). How often does that happen? I don't know if it's enough to warrant both of those guys taking a roster spot. I'd rather Mayfield play up as our big bruiser on the back end than watch Carkner get skated around anymore.

 

[Jester9881]

I don't think that proves your point exactly. Clifford could be more defensively responsible and less of a liability when he's out there, making it easier to keep him in the lineup.

He could be.... but are you willing to say that he's that much better defensively? Do you really want that to be the crux of your argument.... that Kyle Clifford dresses every day because he's a great defensive player? LA doesn't have a better defensive player anywhere in their system? Better defensive players don't get waived?

He's just might be the worst defensive player in LA's entire system.... and he's not likely much better defensively than Eric Boulton is. Nor is he a much better hitter, or apparently a better offensive player. So what gives?

Kyle Clifford gets an NHL paycheck to be a deterrent.

Boulton is really just a 'meh' player, who only is going to be given a chance to do one thing. I'm not big on guys who only do one thing, but I could see the importance. I'd rather carry Boulton than Carkner honestly, but I don't think there's a huge need for them anymore. The kids they were protecting aren't kids anymore.

Did the NHL change drastically since those guys were initially signed to play here? Are Strome, Nelson, Lee, de Haan etc, no longer kids?

While I think your point about Niskanen is true, it's also true that having players respond on their own does a lot more in the effort to protect players and the team than selecting goons to handle your business. The Kings are a big tough team, because everyone on that team is scrappy and willing to stick up for one another (sans Gaborik probably).

So why Kyle Clifford? Youtube his name and tell me how many of his goals come up....

The Bruines are a big tough team, because everyone on that team is scrappy and willing to stick up for one another.

McQuaid, Lucic?

That's what protects your players more than anything else, that us against the world mentality, when the other team knows they better not cross the line or the team will respond in kind.

You haven't named such a team yet, nor has anyone that ever tried making this same argument.

The only time I see the need to dress Carkner, Boulton, and Martin on the same night is if we're playing a team who is literally comprised of all goons (I'm looking at you Calgary). How often does that happen? I don't know if it's enough to warrant both of those guys taking a roster spot. I'd rather Mayfield play up as our big bruiser on the back end than watch Carkner get skated around anymore.

It doesn't happen often, but once is often enough when your franchise's future hinges on a couple players (basically every team in the NHL).

When the Kaleta's, Cookes, Scotts etc "of the NHL" become "of another league", then and only then does your point have merit.

 

[Jester9881]

These are all from the same season.... the year before we signed Boulton and Carkner. I didn't have to search too hard for these...





There were examples every single night from that season.

 

[PK Cronin]

He could be.... but are you willing to say that he's that much better defensively? Do you really want that to be the crux of your argument.... that Kyle Clifford dresses every day because he's a great defensive player? LA doesn't have a better defensive player anywhere in their system? Better defensive players don't get waived?

He's just might be the worst defensive player in LA's entire system.... and he's not likely much better defensively than Eric Boulton is. Nor is he a much better hitter, or apparently a better offensive player. So what gives?

Kyle Clifford gets an NHL paycheck to be a deterrent.

I wasn't implying that Clifford was a good defensive player, simply that him playing does not demonstrate that you are 100% right. I don't watch enough of Clifford during the regular season to comment.

Did the NHL change drastically since those guys were initially signed to play here? Are Strome, Nelson, Lee, de Haan etc, no longer kids?

Lee isn't a kid, no, and he's pretty large. CdH is the same age as Tavares, isn't he? Nelson is plenty big and should be able to handle himself. Strome is the only one of concern to me out of that group.

So why Kyle Clifford? Youtube his name and tell me how many of his goals come up....

Even if Clifford is a deterrent, I'm saying that we don't need three of them on the same roster. I said that I can see the value of having a goon or two, and that I'd rather have Boulton than Carkner. How many is enough?

McQuaid, Lucic?

What about them? They can actually play hockey.

You haven't named such a team yet, nor has anyone that ever tried making this same argument.

Sure. LA is a fine example, regardless of Clifford. Are teams really not taking liberties on their players because they are afraid of the big bad Clifford? No. They don't take liberties on them, as frequently anyway, because they know that the team will respond.

You're confusing having a goon in your lineup and having multiple roster spots being taken for this 'protection' from the press box.

It doesn't happen often, but once is often enough when your franchise's future hinges on a couple players (basically every team in the NHL).

Team toughness would help prevent those incidents from happening. In another thread I provided a bunch of videos of the goons of the NHL where they didn't prevent anything from happening. When Phaneuf flattened Tavares in Toronto this season, Carkner was on the ice. He immediately retaliated, but he didn't prevent anything from happening to Tavares. He simply responded to what happened.

When the Kaleta's, Cookes, Scotts etc "of the NHL" become "of another league", then and only then does your point have merit.

My point has merit now. Don't carry too many redundant goons or you're wasting roster spots and losing points because you're afraid of the 6 games a year where you might need them.

 

[PK Cronin]

These are all from the same season.... the year before we signed Boulton and Carkner. I didn't have to search too hard for these...





There were examples every single night from that season.

I can find examples from last season. Team toughness is my answer to most of this nonsense. (nonsense meaning the cheapshots, not your posts)

 

[Jester9881]

I wasn't implying that Clifford was a good defensive player, simply that him playing does not demonstrate that you are 100% right. I don't watch enough of Clifford during the regular season to comment.

So why do they have him?

Lee isn't a kid, no, and he's pretty large. CdH is the same age as Tavares, isn't he? Nelson is plenty big and should be able to handle himself. Strome is the only one of concern to me out of that group.

How about when Scott decides to toss an elbow into John Tavares' face? He's old enough to handle that though.... right?

Even if Clifford is a deterrent, I'm saying that we don't need three of them on the same roster. I said that I can see the value of having a goon or two, and that I'd rather have Boulton than Carkner. How many is enough?

Ok.... and we have two, so what is the problem? lol

What about them? They can actually play hockey.

How many Lucic's are there in the league? If they didn't have Lucic, Chara and McQuiad (guys that can play), do you honestly think they would go at it without a heavy to protect Bergeron? Based on reality, I can safely say no.

Sure. LA is a fine example, regardless of Clifford. Are teams really not taking liberties on their players because they are afraid of the big bad Clifford? No. They don't take liberties on them, as frequently anyway, because they know that the team will respond.

Ok... and who on the team will respond? See... you can't name a single team without a heavy, unless of course you say "regardless of XYZ". Show me a team without a heavy and I'll show you a team that gets pushed around the ice.

You're confusing having a goon in your lineup and having multiple roster spots being taken for this 'protection' from the press box.

No I'm not.... you're making the mistake of not counting certain players as deterrents just because they're actually pretty good players. The fault in that is, there are an extreme few of those players to go around. Every team has a heavy for protection. Carkner and Boulton are here to stay, you're just going to have to get over it.

Team toughness would help prevent those incidents from happening. In another thread I provided a bunch of videos of the goons of the NHL where they didn't prevent anything from happening. When Phaneuf flattened Tavares in Toronto this season, Carkner was on the ice. He immediately retaliated, but he didn't prevent anything from happening to Tavares. He simply responded to what happened.

And you were rebuffed on those. Carkner came to JT's defense.... and don't you think it was funny that Carkner was out there with JT? I wonder why that was? Imagine if he wasn't there at all..... like it was a few seasons ago when players were taking advantage every single night.

My point has merit now. Don't carry too many redundant goons or you're wasting roster spots and losing points because you're afraid of the 6 games a year where you might need them.

You say 6 games like it's no big deal. All it takes is one dirty hit to decimate this team for an entire year or longer. When you complain about guys like Carkner and Boulton, you're asking for that to happen.... and that pisses me off. I almost hope it happens so I can immediately shove it down the throats of all the Islander fans that have short memories and can't seem to grasp this. I mean, it's not like we haven't lived it before.... all you have to do is go back to the thread where we signed these guys and you will see how welcome they were.

 

[Jester9881]

I can find examples from last season. Team toughness is my answer to most of this nonsense. (nonsense meaning the cheapshots, not your posts)

Who is going to fight John Scott? You seem to have totally blocked the 11-12 season out of your mind.

 

[kuwo]

He'd better be.... he's getting payed a whole lot more! More money.... to play the same role.... which was my point.

Actually Prust has a much larger role as a Canadien. He is a regular penalty killer in the fourth best PK in the league. And even then, most people (except Habs management) would probably agree that he is still an overpaid player. So I don't think there is any comparison to Boulton.

Clifford a young reliable energy guy with some upside (or maybe not) and also very good possession numbers.

Honestly, I'm not sure I saw any difference when Boulton or Carkner were or were not in the lineup regarding team toughness. Isles still could not handle the the Ducks or the Kings when they turned it on despite Carkner being in the lineup (small sample size, i know).

I rememer that one game against the Maple Leafs, where the comeback was attributed to Boulton's and Carkner's fights, however Carkner was responsible for first two goals against.

 

[Sparksrus3]

These are all from the same season.... the year before we signed Boulton and Carkner. I didn't have to search too hard for these...





There were examples every single night from that season.

For me the Briere stick swing was in the same category as the Chris Simon stick swing.
Maybe worse as it was definetly premeditated. Simons was a reaction after the hard hit.

 

[rikker]

Actually Prust has a much larger role as a Canadien. He is a regular penalty killer in the fourth best PK in the league. And even then, most people (except Habs management) would probably agree that he is still an overpaid player. So I don't think there is any comparison to Boulton.

Clifford a young reliable energy guy with some upside (or maybe not) and also very good possession numbers.

Honestly, I'm not sure I saw any difference when Boulton or Carkner were or were not in the lineup regarding team toughness. Isles still could not handle the the Ducks or the Kings when they turned it on despite Carkner being in the lineup (small sample size, i know).

I rememer that one game against the Maple Leafs, where the comeback was attributed to Boulton's and Carkner's fights, however Carkner was responsible for first two goals against.

in all fairness, Prust is not a heavyweight. he would get smushed by Boulton or Carkner.

one of the many, many instances, in which we saw and 'felt' the power of the protector, was when Cairns beat down on that POS Corson. yeah, the Leafs eventually beat us out, but anyone could see how that deflated them. the Leaf fans that i knew blamed their failure to go farther, on this incident. said we took the wind out of their sails. as long as the league and referees will be lax on goonery, protectors will be a part of the teams. if we have to pay a guy $600,000 and he helps JT stay healthy, it is well worth it.

this is the highest level of hockey in the world, with the best minds in it. if a team ploiceman wasn't needed, he wouldn't be there...

 

[seafoam]

Just call Boulton up when needed, he'll make it through waivers.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Just call Boulton up when needed, he'll make it through waivers.

I was thinking the same thing. Is there anyone who thinks Eric Boulton gets claimed?

If so, call up Brett Gallant. Guys who suck at hockey but beat face well are a dime a dozen.