tom webster Posted February 3, 2010 Report Posted February 3, 2010 That may be so, but my God we have alot invested in this guy. We took him what? 13th overall, in the double entry draft right after the lockout. Theoretically, he should have went 6th or 7th overall in any other draft. The guy is also taking a cap hit around 3 million. I expect alot more out of him. A) we took Zagrapan after the lockout, otherwise known as the Crosby lottery b) his cap hit is $1.9 million, which in my bank account isn't around $3 million
spndnchz Posted February 3, 2010 Report Posted February 3, 2010 That may be so, but my God we have alot invested in this guy. We took him what? 13th overall, in the double entry draft right after the lockout. Theoretically, he should have went 6th or 7th overall in any other draft. The guy is also taking a cap hit around 3 million. I expect alot more out of him. I think Staff's around 1.9 cap I break a nail and TW beats me to it.
SwampD Posted February 3, 2010 Report Posted February 3, 2010 Paging Dr. Inkman, pink courtesy phone.... You said pink.
Derrico Posted February 3, 2010 Report Posted February 3, 2010 A) we took Zagrapan after the lockout, otherwise known as the Crosby lottery b) his cap hit is $1.9 million, which in my bank account isn't around $3 million Ok then, I certainly stand corrected. I'm at work so I didn't have time to look up his exact figures but googled Drew Stafford's salary and up came 2,995,625 or something around that. Anyways, as for the other point, I was almost positive that we took Stafford in the Crosby Lottery. I again stand corrected, wow, that Zagrapan pick is really stinging right now....
LabattBlue Posted February 3, 2010 Report Posted February 3, 2010 Ok then, I certainly stand corrected. I'm at work so I didn't have time to look up his exact figures but googled Drew Stafford's salary and up came 2,995,625 or something around that. Anyways, as for the other point, I was almost positive that we took Stafford in the Crosby Lottery. I again stand corrected, wow, that Zagrapan pick is really stinging right now.... I'm still wondering about the double entry draft?
themaze2332 Posted February 3, 2010 Report Posted February 3, 2010 Not sure what this has to do with my post about Vanek, but I will bite since I just can't help myself. 1. He has been bad on the PP of late. He has to be better ... but he has been better in the past. It's a bad streath that fortunately has not killed the team. As I have said several times on this thread, don't just yell "TRADE HIM!" without offering a realistic alternative. If you really think this team would be better if he was off the team with nothing in return, you are wrong. 2. So you think that as Roy crosses the blue line, he thinks, "I can't shoot, I might miss and be blamed, let me pass it so someone else gets blamed." Really? This is how a pro athlete thinks? Not to mention that it is obviously not working because Ruff keeps calling him out in the media and having meetings with him, so he is getting plenty of blame. I have no idea what this has to do with his skill being limited. 3. Roy is at 49% on faceoffs ... second best on the team among centers ... also better than guys such as Getzlaf, Horcoff, Plekanec, Jordan Staal, Eric Staal ... in other words, he is about average. He has had a bad year overall but faceoffs are not really his problem. 4. Roy is not nearly as bad as Max. If nothing else he is a very good penalty killer (which you ignore completely) ... I agree he has too many turnovers, but he is on pace for about 20 fewer giveaways than last season ... and has only five more than Max despite playing center and having the puck a lot more ... so really the issue is he needs to be more productive, something no one has disputed. If he had 60 points right now, no one would be complaining about his turnovers. He needs to produce as he has in the past. I don't think it's rose-colored glasses so much as trying not to overreact. Again, if they could move Roy in a deal and get someone more like Patrick Sharp ... bigger guy, better on draws, still good production ... but there are not many of those guys out there, and most of them cost more. But again, show me a realistic alternative. I am not yelling to trade him, I just want him to be held accountable, much like Montador, Kennedy, and Stafford have been. He has always been a Lindy favorite, so I think he has been able to "get away" with being sub-par from time to time. He is on the PK and he does a good job most times, but does that negate his awful job on the PP? I'm not sure...I agree that I would rather have him be awful on the PP than on the PK. But if he is not doing a good job on the PP, why not try someone else instead of forcing the issue? In terms of face-offs...I suppose his inability to win the "important ones" makes me angry...like on the PK or in the offensive zone. Again, not trying to trade him. Just want him to do more. And if he is not successful in a situation, I would like Lindy to try someone else a la shootouts. He has been pretty crappy and was not involved in the last one against the NJD. And we won. Good move.
Derrico Posted February 4, 2010 Report Posted February 4, 2010 I'm still wondering about the double entry draft? Well after my last two gaffes, I may be wrong once again. But.... during the lockout, I believe that there was suppose to be an NHL Entry draft that did not occurr as a result of the lockout. Therefore, the year after the lockout, (apparently when we took Zagrapan) there were twice as many eligable players for that draft. Again, I'm probably wrong on this and too lazy/don't have time to look it up.
BetweenThePipes00 Posted February 4, 2010 Report Posted February 4, 2010 Well after my last two gaffes, I may be wrong once again. But.... during the lockout, I believe that there was suppose to be an NHL Entry draft that did not occurr as a result of the lockout. Therefore, the year after the lockout, (apparently when we took Zagrapan) there were twice as many eligable players for that draft. Again, I'm probably wrong on this and too lazy/don't have time to look it up. Yeah unfortunately you are wrong ... there was a draft in the summer of 2004 ... it was the Ovechkin-Malkin draft ... if there HAD been a double draft, it would have been pretty cool, though ... Ovechkin or Crosby #1?
shrader Posted February 4, 2010 Report Posted February 4, 2010 Well after my last two gaffes, I may be wrong once again. But.... during the lockout, I believe that there was suppose to be an NHL Entry draft that did not occurr as a result of the lockout. Therefore, the year after the lockout, (apparently when we took Zagrapan) there were twice as many eligable players for that draft. Again, I'm probably wrong on this and too lazy/don't have time to look it up. No draft was ever skipped. The year before the lockout was the Ovechkin-Malkin draft. The only thing that was actually combined were the two rookie classes coming out of the lockout, possibly the best pool of rookies this league has ever seen.
nfreeman Posted February 4, 2010 Report Posted February 4, 2010 Well after my last two gaffes, I may be wrong once again. But.... during the lockout, I believe that there was suppose to be an NHL Entry draft that did not occurr as a result of the lockout. Therefore, the year after the lockout, (apparently when we took Zagrapan) there were twice as many eligable players for that draft. Again, I'm probably wrong on this and too lazy/don't have time to look it up. Then don't waste other people's time by posting about it.
tom webster Posted February 4, 2010 Report Posted February 4, 2010 Well after my last two gaffes, I may be wrong once again. But.... during the lockout, I believe that there was suppose to be an NHL Entry draft that did not occurr as a result of the lockout. Therefore, the year after the lockout, (apparently when we took Zagrapan) there were twice as many eligable players for that draft. Again, I'm probably wrong on this and too lazy/don't have time to look it up. There was not. They held both drafts when they were supposed to. The only difference was the draft after the lockout they used a weighted lottery to determine positions. That may be how you confused Stafford, who was taken in 2004 with Zagrapan, who was taken in 2005, both with the 13th picks...
Simpson8 Posted February 4, 2010 Report Posted February 4, 2010 Butler as well, he is afraid of contact out there.
Derrico Posted February 4, 2010 Report Posted February 4, 2010 Then don't waste other people's time by posting about it. Oh come one nfreeman, you're on here ALL the time. You have over 3,000 posts. I don't think that you're so busy that you can't waste four seconds reading a post. It's good discussion on here (and a nice five min break from work) so relax. I've read countless posts that I thought were a waste but had no problem reading them. Grow up.
darksabre Posted February 4, 2010 Report Posted February 4, 2010 Please trade Stafford. Yes. His little spurt after being benched and subsequent fall back into mediocrity has solidified my stance on this. The guy is a bum.
Two or less Posted February 4, 2010 Report Posted February 4, 2010 Butler as well, he is afraid of contact out there. Unless Butler is the "deal breaker" in a big trade, like a Dustin Penner or a Brad Boyes (just throwing those 2 out there) then I wouldn't trade Butler. He's not bad. He's pretty good offensively and has made a ton of mistakes this season in his own end, but i think it's more of him being rushed then anything. Many players go through "sophomore slumps". I think he's run out of gas. Butler shouldn't be playing right now. I am not saying Butler is untouchable, but i am not ready to quit on him, but i do think he needs to sit and sit often.
Stoner Posted February 4, 2010 Report Posted February 4, 2010 Then don't waste other people's time by posting about it. What is this, graduate school? It's hockey talk. Relax.
SwampD Posted February 4, 2010 Report Posted February 4, 2010 What is this, graduate school? It's hockey talk. Relax. You really need to get a new avitar. I need to know how to feel about your posts before I read them.
Stoner Posted February 4, 2010 Report Posted February 4, 2010 You really need to get a new avitar. I need to know how to feel about your posts before I read them. I tried to post one and it got all bolloxed up. And I lost the Christmas bulb!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.