Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Hypothetically, merely adding Staal and then losing Larsson could result in somewhat of a status quo net result for a centre unit we all considered to be in drastic need of improvement. 

We have to look at our roster right now and think about who's going to be lining up at C, as of now. They may still be adding a centre, I was just saying it's interesting there isn't buzz around any. 

They probably should’ve added one in the draft. 😬

Posted
1 minute ago, Thorny said:

Hypothetically, merely adding Staal and then losing Larsson could result in somewhat of a status quo net result for a centre unit we all considered to be in drastic need of improvement. 

We have to look at our roster right now and think about who's going to be lining up at C, as of now. They may still be adding a centre, I was just saying it's interesting there isn't buzz around any. 

I think that with Eichel and Staal both #1&2, they already feel they have improved by getting a legitimate #2 C, now its replacing a #3 C for larson which isn't likely to be a big splash kind of deal or something they are going to focus on right away. Especially if they feel that maybe someone like Casey could take that role this year.

Posted
Just now, SDS said:

They probably should’ve added one in the draft. 😬

I'd say you can't draft for need but Rossi could be NHL ready! That's ok they are going to shift Quinn over 😉

Posted
Just now, apuszczalowski said:

I think that with Eichel and Staal both #1&2, they already feel they have improved by getting a legitimate #2 C, now its replacing a #3 C for larson which isn't likely to be a big splash kind of deal or something they are going to focus on right away. Especially if they feel that maybe someone like Casey could take that role this year.

I mean this with all due respect - you are drastically undervaluing what Larsson was relied upon for us. Unbelievably, league-tough matchups that he did remarkably well in, we relied on him in a very defensively skewed, defensive zone start based role and he excelled. He was our second C by ice time. He's so so valuable. If you get a chance, take a gander and Risto's advanced metrics when WITH Larsson, and when WITHOUT. 

Casey could easily not be an NHL player. Him replacing Larsson is akin to Ennis replacing McDavid. 

Posted
Just now, Thorny said:

I mean this with all due respect - you are drastically undervaluing what Larsson was relied upon for us. Unbelievably, league-tough matchups that he did remarkably well in, we relied on him in a very defensively skewed, defensive zone start based role and he excelled. He was our second C by ice time. He's so so valuable. If you get a chance, take a gander and Risto's advanced metrics when WITH Larsson, and when WITHOUT. 

Casey could easily not be an NHL player. Him replacing Larsson is akin to Ennis replacing McDavid. 

It depends. Does McDavid still have Covid?

Posted
1 minute ago, Thorny said:

I mean this with all due respect - you are drastically undervaluing what Larsson was relied upon for us. Unbelievably, league-tough matchups that he did remarkably well in, we relied on him in a very defensively skewed, defensive zone start based role and he excelled. He was our second C by ice time. He's so so valuable. If you get a chance, take a gander and Risto's advanced metrics when WITH Larsson, and when WITHOUT. 

Casey could easily not be an NHL player. Him replacing Larsson is akin to Ennis replacing McDavid. 

And yet they are letting him walk?

I'm not saying I like their plan, but 3rd line C isn't something you need to put all your focus into at the start of FA unless thats the only need your team has...

Posted
Just now, apuszczalowski said:

And yet they are letting him walk?

I'm not saying I like their plan, but 3rd line C isn't something you need to put all your focus into at the start of FA unless thats the only need your team has...

Larsson is a UFA. He get's to decide if he wants to walk. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, IKnowPhysics said:

The right question is what was I expecting in the one-way contract and use of a roster spot range.

True, and I'm not going to argue that, but not every roster spot is going to be top tier players, there have to be some to fill the bottom

Posted
Just now, apuszczalowski said:

True, and I'm not going to argue that, but not every roster spot is going to be top tier players, there have to be some to fill the bottom

?but do all have to feed the bottom?

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...