cccsberg

So Where do we go from here? Analysis & Predictions

2,609 posts in this topic

Here is my hopes for the offseason, my dream scenerio, the likelihood? Who knows...

 

I would absolutely love to see T.J. Oshie test the market, and if he does, we need to go after him aggressively, we would finally have our true top line caliber RW to play with Johnny/Mony, and what a line that would be! For this to happen we would need to have Vegas scoop Brouwer in the expansion draft to clear up the cap space.

 

With Darling seemingly off the market, Ben Bishop is left as our target in goal, go get him! If Elliott would sign for 1.5-2 to remain, that gives us a solid G tandem, if Elliott takes off  Johnson resigns as a solid backup as well.

 

Hopefully BT can work some cap magic and rid us of some cap space as we need to resign Versteeg, Bennett, Stone, Lazar etc, it would be nice if we could somehow rid ourselves of Stajan and Bouma's contracts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

The WOW came from your comment about Tkachuk and Bennett being the only players from this group we could expect LT improvement from ? Explain this one.

As far as youth replacing aging or further experienced players of course there will be an experience laps but a some immediate physical benefit of play in certain cases. Some catch up and catch on fast others not so much. I don't think you can lump everyone into the same pace due to physical and mental make up of the individuals. There are many ingredients that form the make up of a successful team, needs we don't have can sometimes be dealt with by trades and sometimes you wait.

Who has decided we are in our window to succeed YOU ? what is your definition of success, winning the SC ? Your last 3 sentences are why there is a league in order to play the games and measure who the best teams are year to year. The Flames have some work to do in a few areas however IMO maturity and experience is the key for this current group. The position pieces are obvious.

Not a lot of benefit in arguing over misunderstandings.  Have a nice day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Stajan is tradable. His contract sucks but if we retain salary it could be worth it to another team, and retaining salary could be a better option than a buyout as he'd be off the books. 

 

Or would losing Bouma make Stajan' contract feel better on the 4th? We could have a guy half his price and get the same results... 

 

The team took a huge leap this year that I didn't think they had in them because of what I saw when Hartley was a coach. We need to see continual improvements from all players.

 

i would like to see the PP improve. Watching the pens last night, their pp is a thing of beauty. They pass naturally and wing it around the zone so nicely. We tend to force a lot of passes into danger areas where opponents can intercept the puck and we have to start all over. When that happens twice a whiole minute comes off the clock.

 

we need the PP to be clicking on a regular basis. It keeps momentum in a game, or can lose it for you as well. It improved but not enough.

 

The PK is the same. Improved but could be better. Goaltending could be the difference maker there.

 

i want better goaltending. I've been one to defend goalies, but this time they frustrated me. I don't give the team any breaks and hope the mental lapses go away with maturity. 

 

Do we add anyone? If we can rid ourselves of either Bouma and Stajan, or of Brouwer, yes we can try to add help. 

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk/xxx

Ferland/Tchuk, Backlund, Frolik

Versteeg, Bennett, Brouwer/Ferly

 

 

The 4th is the mystery. Do we want Jankowski to play big minutes or has he made a case to move up to the big club?

 

i have a feeling we have enough to go on without adding someone. Re-sign Versteeg to a 1-2 year deal.

 

can Lazar play on the top line or Tkachuk? Lazar would  be a better version of Chiasson? But would a Tkachuk on the top line end up looking closer to the line he played on in London?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I think Stajan is tradable. His contract sucks but if we retain salary it could be worth it to another team, and retaining salary could be a better option than a buyout as he'd be off the books. 

 

Or would losing Bouma make Stajan' contract feel better on the 4th? We could have a guy half his price and get the same results... 

 

The team took a huge leap this year that I didn't think they had in them because of what I saw when Hartley was a coach. We need to see continual improvements from all players.

 

i would like to see the PP improve. Watching the pens last night, their pp is a thing of beauty. They pass naturally and wing it around the zone so nicely. We tend to force a lot of passes into danger areas where opponents can intercept the puck and we have to start all over. When that happens twice a whiole minute comes off the clock.

 

we need the PP to be clicking on a regular basis. It keeps momentum in a game, or can lose it for you as well. It improved but not enough.

 

The PK is the same. Improved but could be better. Goaltending could be the difference maker there.

 

i want better goaltending. I've been one to defend goalies, but this time they frustrated me. I don't give the team any breaks and hope the mental lapses go away with maturity. 

 

Do we add anyone? If we can rid ourselves of either Bouma and Stajan, or of Brouwer, yes we can try to add help. 

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk/xxx

Ferland/Tchuk, Backlund, Frolik

Versteeg, Bennett, Brouwer/Ferly

 

 

The 4th is the mystery. Do we want Jankowski to play big minutes or has he made a case to move up to the big club?

 

i have a feeling we have enough to go on without adding someone. Re-sign Versteeg to a 1-2 year deal.

 

can Lazar play on the top line or Tkachuk? Lazar would  be a better version of Chiasson? But would a Tkachuk on the top line end up looking closer to the line he played on in London?

 

 

 

At the risk of sounding like a broken record here are the changes or moves I would like to see made or adjustments.

Try and get TJ Oshie as a UFA, if not use Tkachuk with Gaudreau and Monahan next season(see how it goes)

Stajan, Bouma and Chiasson gone.

Engelland and Stone re-signed, Engelland for 1 year at 1.8M and Stone 3 years at 3.75M per season.

If Brouwer remains resign Versteeg at 1.5M for 1 year. If Brouwer gets claimed don't resign him.

Bring up Jankowski to C the 4th line.

Re-sign both Elliott and Johnson on 2 year deals with slight raises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

At the risk of sounding like a broken record here are the changes or moves I would like to see made or adjustments.

Try and get TJ Oshie as a UFA, if not use Tkachuk with Gaudreau and Monahan next season(see how it goes)

Stajan, Bouma and Chiasson gone.

Engelland and Stone re-signed, Engelland for 1 year at 1.8M and Stone 3 years at 3.75M per season.

If Brouwer remains resign Versteeg at 1.5M for 1 year. If Brouwer gets claimed don't resign him.

Bring up Jankowski to C the 4th line.

Re-sign both Elliott and Johnson on 2 year deals with slight raises.

I would be keeping chiasson for a good 4th line player. Once he stepped into the 4th line role he was very good, and while he is replaceable with the right player, I dont see why we wouldnt want him back for the right side at under a million. I would be keeping him to anchor a younger 4th line. I dont see us getting oshie if brouwer stays, combine that with engelland and stone being resigned we are going to get ourselves into trouble with the cap.

 

Defence with stone- 20.9 million not including bottom pairing guys such as engelland.

Forwards- 40.8 + Brouwer 4.5 = 45.3 

66.2 million in cap without bottom pairing defenders, and goalies.

 

Gaudreau(6.75)-mony(6,375)-oshie(6)

tkachuk(0.925)-Backlund(3.575)-Frolik(4.3)

Ferland(2)-Bennett(3)-Versteeg (1.5)

Bouma(2.25)-Stajan(3.125)-Chiasson(1)

 

Forwards- 32.85

Defence 20.9 with stone signing, no 4th dman or 6.7 guy.

Total 56.75 with stajan, bouma, brouwer gone with no goalies.

 

Gaudreau(6.75)-mony(6,375)-Lazar(1.5)

tkachuk(0.925)-Backlund(3.575)-Frolik(4.3)

Ferland(2)-Bennett(3)-Versteeg (1.5)

Random LW(1)-Jankowski(0.925)-Chiasson(1)

 

So obviously if we can get rid of stajan, bouma we are still at 40 million, if we keep brouwer. As much as I think oshie would be a good fit next year, long term its going to kill our cap even if you subtract bouma, stajan, brouwer, etc. Our Forward group without bouma, stajan, brouwer is highlighted in bold and only costs us 32.85. So yes we do have room for oshie, but at the same time we might be cutting into money for future spending on players such as bennett, lazar, janko and free agent signings that might fit better then oshie. I dont forsee us signing oshie for the above reasons and I dont think we will be signing stone at 3.75 for 3 as I dont think he fits here as more then a 3rd pairing guy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, cccsberg said:

Not a lot of benefit in arguing over misunderstandings.  Have a nice day.

Now that I have a few moments, let me expand.  My thinking on player improvement is that although everyone can improve during their whole life, with hockey guys the biggest improvements happen early in their careers which is why I said Bennett and Tkachuk have the most improvement POTEntiAL.  Others can as well but I'm doubtful it'll be as significant as the former two.  I may be wrong but that's the comment.

 

As for "deciding we are in our window", no I wasn't saying that we are, just that once we are can we assume that trades will work to make a significant improvement to put the team over the top?  Typically teams in that position trade picks and prospects for the near-term here and now but its far from a sure thing.  Just look at Minnesota, Washington... and etc as examples.  Sure it helps, but it doesn't always get you over the top.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I would be keeping chiasson for a good 4th line player. Once he stepped into the 4th line role he was very good, and while he is replaceable with the right player, I dont see why we wouldnt want him back for the right side at under a million. I would be keeping him to anchor a younger 4th line. I dont see us getting oshie if brouwer stays, combine that with engelland and stone being resigned we are going to get ourselves into trouble with the cap.

 

Defence with stone- 20.9 million not including bottom pairing guys such as engelland.

Forwards- 40.8 + Brouwer 4.5 = 45.3 

66.2 million in cap without bottom pairing defenders, and goalies.

 

Gaudreau(6.75)-mony(6,375)-oshie(6)

tkachuk(0.925)-Backlund(3.575)-Frolik(4.3)

Ferland(2)-Bennett(3)-Versteeg (1.5)

Bouma(2.25)-Stajan(3.125)-Chiasson(1)

 

Forwards- 32.85

Defence 20.9 with stone signing, no 4th dman or 6.7 guy.

Total 56.75 with stajan, bouma, brouwer gone with no goalies.

 

Gaudreau(6.75)-mony(6,375)-Lazar(1.5)

tkachuk(0.925)-Backlund(3.575)-Frolik(4.3)

Ferland(2)-Bennett(3)-Versteeg (1.5)

Random LW(1)-Jankowski(0.925)-Chiasson(1)

 

So obviously if we can get rid of stajan, bouma we are still at 40 million, if we keep brouwer. As much as I think oshie would be a good fit next year, long term its going to kill our cap even if you subtract bouma, stajan, brouwer, etc. Our Forward group without bouma, stajan, brouwer is highlighted in bold and only costs us 32.85. So yes we do have room for oshie, but at the same time we might be cutting into money for future spending on players such as bennett, lazar, janko and free agent signings that might fit better then oshie. I dont forsee us signing oshie for the above reasons and I dont think we will be signing stone at 3.75 for 3 as I dont think he fits here as more then a 3rd pairing guy. 

 

 

You can't really fit Oshie in if we got rid of Stajan and Bouma as well. They combine for what about 5m? They still require about 2m to make up what you miss without him. So that leaves only the Stajan contract to use.

 

i think we have enough in house to make up for what Oshie brings. GG would just have to move guys around and hope that Tkachuk takes another step forward. We should really concentrate on finding Bennett a solution. That could be Ferland if he doesn't stick with the top line. If that's the case, I think Ferland's skill will shine on the 3rd.

 

but I still like the idea of Bennett as a wing, but don't mind him at C either. I am not as cemented to the idea as others are. I think sometimes teams gotta bend. Right now, groom him as a C though, until someone pushes him to the wing. Either way, I think we have a bright future with him. Just a matter of time and patience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I would be keeping chiasson for a good 4th line player. Once he stepped into the 4th line role he was very good, and while he is replaceable with the right player, I dont see why we wouldnt want him back for the right side at under a million. I would be keeping him to anchor a younger 4th line. I dont see us getting oshie if brouwer stays, combine that with engelland and stone being resigned we are going to get ourselves into trouble with the cap.

 

Defence with stone- 20.9 million not including bottom pairing guys such as engelland.

Forwards- 40.8 + Brouwer 4.5 = 45.3 

66.2 million in cap without bottom pairing defenders, and goalies.

 

Gaudreau(6.75)-mony(6,375)-oshie(6)

tkachuk(0.925)-Backlund(3.575)-Frolik(4.3)

Ferland(2)-Bennett(3)-Versteeg (1.5)

Bouma(2.25)-Stajan(3.125)-Chiasson(1)

 

Forwards- 32.85

Defence 20.9 with stone signing, no 4th dman or 6.7 guy.

Total 56.75 with stajan, bouma, brouwer gone with no goalies.

 

Gaudreau(6.75)-mony(6,375)-Lazar(1.5)

tkachuk(0.925)-Backlund(3.575)-Frolik(4.3)

Ferland(2)-Bennett(3)-Versteeg (1.5)

Random LW(1)-Jankowski(0.925)-Chiasson(1)

 

So obviously if we can get rid of stajan, bouma we are still at 40 million, if we keep brouwer. As much as I think oshie would be a good fit next year, long term its going to kill our cap even if you subtract bouma, stajan, brouwer, etc. Our Forward group without bouma, stajan, brouwer is highlighted in bold and only costs us 32.85. So yes we do have room for oshie, but at the same time we might be cutting into money for future spending on players such as bennett, lazar, janko and free agent signings that might fit better then oshie. I dont forsee us signing oshie for the above reasons and I dont think we will be signing stone at 3.75 for 3 as I dont think he fits here as more then a 3rd pairing guy. 

I didn't elaborate my thoughts into lines but I give Stajan and Bouma's money to TJ Oshie whether we lose Brouwer or not. If we have Brouwer and Versteeg we don't need Chiasson IMO. I will be surprised if BT gives ferland 2M and Bennett 3M bit we will see. Here goes.

Gaudreau 6.75, Monahan 6.35, TJ Oshie 6M ( could be less)

Frolik 4.3, Backlund 3.75M, Brouwer 4.5M

Tkachuk 925K, Bennett 1.5M, Lazar 1M

Ferland 1.5M, Jankowski 925K, Versteeg 1.5M

Hamilton 700K, Hathaway 700K

DEFENSE
Girodano 6.75M, Hamilton 5.4M

Brodie 4.3M, Stone 3,75M

Bartkowski 675K, Engelland 1.8M

Extra 700K

GOALIES

Elliott 3.5M

Johnson 2M

Give or take 69.3M Good looking team

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Free agent signings are risky, as we saw with Brouwer this year.  Oshie will be looking to score big like Lucic and Eriksson did last year, and those are terrible contracts, not so much because of the money but because of the term.  Lucic especially will be an anchor in a year or two when his play drops off and McDavid and Drais need new contracts.  The oilers really only have this year and next before their current window narrows as they try to manage their cap situation.  They currently have 3 forwards making 6 mill a season, and you better believe Leon and Connor will get that and more.  Let's try to avoid that if we can.

 

My dream scenario I guess has us shedding Brouwer, Bouma and Stajan.  See if we can add a slightly cheaper UFA forward into the mix for short term, like maybe Vanek or Gagne.  Try to keep Versteeg.  Promote one or two from the farm (Jankowski).  Trade for Matt Murray (I don't want MAF), otherwise resign Elliot. Bishop is too expensive, and did not exactly impress this year.  Sign another d like Stone, Alzner or Del Zotto if they stay under 4 million, promote someone from the farm again (Andersson or Kulak?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ABC923 said:

Free agent signings are risky, as we saw with Brouwer this year.  Oshie will be looking to score big like Lucic and Eriksson did last year, and those are terrible contracts, not so much because of the money but because of the term.  Lucic especially will be an anchor in a year or two when his play drops off and McDavid and Drais need new contracts.  The oilers really only have this year and next before their current window narrows as they try to manage their cap situation.  They currently have 3 forwards making 6 mill a season, and you better believe Leon and Connor will get that and more.  Let's try to avoid that if we can.

 

My dream scenario I guess has us shedding Brouwer, Bouma and Stajan.  See if we can add a slightly cheaper UFA forward into the mix for short term, like maybe Vanek or Gagne.  Try to keep Versteeg.  Promote one or two from the farm (Jankowski).  Trade for Matt Murray (I don't want MAF), otherwise resign Elliot. Bishop is too expensive, and did not exactly impress this year.  Sign another d like Stone, Alzner or Del Zotto if they stay under 4 million, promote someone from the farm again (Andersson or Kulak?).

i agree.. unless you can keep Oshie near his current salary and get him term , i think you regret him in a few years ..   also hoping that we shed both Bouma and Stajan, Id actually target a short term guy like Patrick Eaves.. only makes 1.2M now, he's 32 so hes not scoring big in UFA.. I think you get him under 2 if you give him 3 years ..cant deny he scores key goals.. could be just what Bennett Needs .even if it costs you 2.5 for 2 years , he had only 1 less goal than Oshie this year 

Nate Thompson is another guy I look into , except hes a center and I'm pretty sure Jankowski gets that #4 spot this year 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

I didn't elaborate my thoughts into lines but I give Stajan and Bouma's money to TJ Oshie whether we lose Brouwer or not. If we have Brouwer and Versteeg we don't need Chiasson IMO. I will be surprised if BT gives ferland 2M and Bennett 3M bit we will see. Here goes.

Gaudreau 6.75, Monahan 6.35, TJ Oshie 6M ( could be less)

Frolik 4.3, Backlund 3.75M, Brouwer 4.5M

Tkachuk 925K, Bennett 1.5M, Lazar 1M

Ferland 1.5M, Jankowski 925K, Versteeg 1.5M

Hamilton 700K, Hathaway 700K

DEFENSE
Girodano 6.75M, Hamilton 5.4M

Brodie 4.3M, Stone 3,75M

Bartkowski 675K, Engelland 1.8M

Extra 700K

GOALIES

Elliott 3.5M

Johnson 2M

Give or take 69.3M Good looking team

 

 

The only thing about giving Oshie that money is, you still have to pay the 4th line which will count for about 2.5 - 3M towards the Cap as well. So some of their savings  will be needed on the 4th regardless. That leaves about 3 or less to sign someone with their saved salary. Half of it will be required to fill out the rest of the roster. Does that include Chiasson and Versteeg money then? I guess those contracts can be taken into account as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, robrob74 said:

 

The only thing about giving Oshie that money is, you still have to pay the 4th line which will count for about 2.5 - 3M towards the Cap as well. So some of their savings  will be needed on the 4th regardless. That leaves about 3 or less to sign someone with their saved salary. Half of it will be required to fill out the rest of the roster. Does that include Chiasson and Versteeg money then? I guess those contracts can be taken into account as well.

I accounted above for everyone on the roster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, ABC923 said:

Free agent signings are risky, as we saw with Brouwer this year.  Oshie will be looking to score big like Lucic and Eriksson did last year, and those are terrible contracts, not so much because of the money but because of the term.  Lucic especially will be an anchor in a year or two when his play drops off and McDavid and Drais need new contracts.  The oilers really only have this year and next before their current window narrows as they try to manage their cap situation.  They currently have 3 forwards making 6 mill a season, and you better believe Leon and Connor will get that and more.  Let's try to avoid that if we can.

 

My dream scenario I guess has us shedding Brouwer, Bouma and Stajan.  See if we can add a slightly cheaper UFA forward into the mix for short term, like maybe Vanek or Gagne.  Try to keep Versteeg.  Promote one or two from the farm (Jankowski).  Trade for Matt Murray (I don't want MAF), otherwise resign Elliot. Bishop is too expensive, and did not exactly impress this year.  Sign another d like Stone, Alzner or Del Zotto if they stay under 4 million, promote someone from the farm again (Andersson or Kulak?).

If we cannot get Oshie at like 5.5 for 4 years we don't need to do a deal but there is no denying he would get us closer to contending seriously IMO with keeping Brouwer. I mentioned in another post a line of Frolik, Backlund and Brouwer would be one of the best shut down lines in the NHL with secondary scoring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MAC331 said:

If we cannot get Oshie at like 5.5 for 4 years we don't need to do a deal but there is no denying he would get us closer to contending seriously IMO with keeping Brouwer. I mentioned in another post a line of Frolik, Backlund and Brouwer would be one of the best shut down lines in the NHL with secondary scoring.

I honestly think two years is too long, id rather pay 7 over 2 years then get the term. I dont want him signed either way, as I think we can replace internally with a deeper team. Not that I disagree with you that he makes us a better team, but id much rather our bottom 3 D men and 3rd/4th lines be better. I dont think engelland/bartwoski or bennett/stajan lost us the series. Actually I think bennett had a very good playoffs, but if anything we proved this year we arent a deep enough team yet. If we could fix bennetts linemates and ice a solid 4th line(they had their moments but were inconsistent), we would be much better then with oshie.  If we can replace stajan and bouma great, but honestly id be okay if we put stajan on jankos wing with chiasson on the other side going into next year. I think my lines for next year might look like

 

Gaudreau-Mony-Ferland

Frolik-Backlund-Brouwer

Tkachuk-Bennett-Lazar

Stajan-Janko-Chiasson

Etc. Hamilton/bouma if you cant get rid of him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I honestly think two years is too long, id rather pay 7 over 2 years then get the term. I dont want him signed either way, as I think we can replace internally with a deeper team. Not that I disagree with you that he makes us a better team, but id much rather our bottom 3 D men and 3rd/4th lines be better. I dont think engelland/bartwoski or bennett/stajan lost us the series. Actually I think bennett had a very good playoffs, but if anything we proved this year we arent a deep enough team yet. If we could fix bennetts linemates and ice a solid 4th line(they had their moments but were inconsistent), we would be much better then with oshie.  If we can replace stajan and bouma great, but honestly id be okay if we put stajan on jankos wing with chiasson on the other side going into next year. I think my lines for next year might look like

 

Gaudreau-Mony-Ferland

Frolik-Backlund-Brouwer

Tkachuk-Bennett-Lazar

Stajan-Janko-Chiasson

Etc. Hamilton/bouma if you cant get rid of him.

Yeah sorry you won't convince me in a million years it is worth keeping Stajan or Bouma for another year on this team. I am not against leaving Ferland with Gaudreau and Monahan but I don't think that should be our final answer for that position. We have a number of LW players coming that we need the 4th line entry spot for such as Klimchuk, Shinkaruk and Lomberg. As I said if they sign Versteeg you don't need Chiasson for the 4th line RW and I would rather have some opportunity for Hathaway and possibly Pribyl to have an entry RW position next season.

Outside of Giordano, Hamilton and Brodie it should be interesting to see the plan for 4 more defensemen.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

Yeah sorry you won't convince me in a million years it is worth keeping Stajan or Bouma for another year on this team. I am not against leaving Ferland with Gaudreau and Monahan but I don't think that should be our final answer for that position. We have a number of LW players coming that we need the 4th line entry spot for such as Klimchuk, Shinkaruk and Lomberg. As I said if they sign Versteeg you don't need Chiasson for the 4th line RW and I would rather have some opportunity for Hathaway and possibly Pribyl to have an entry RW position next season.

Outside of Giordano, Hamilton and Brodie it should be interesting to see the plan for 4 more defensemen.

agreed.. only thing on Bouma, is he needs to be replaced with a Better Bouma..  Stajan absolutely is replaceable from within , Maybe Bouma is too..  but we do need the Size and style he brings.. just better .  Maybe thats in the system, I dont know .  If its not , i can accept keeping Bouma, but if we can replace him that way I'm all over it 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

agreed.. only thing on Bouma, is he needs to be replaced with a Better Bouma..  Stajan absolutely is replaceable from within , Maybe Bouma is too..  but we do need the Size and style he brings.. just better .  Maybe thats in the system, I dont know .  If its not , i can accept keeping Bouma, but if we can replace him that way I'm all over it 

I'm not convinced we need to much size factor from that 4th LW position or more effective checking and toughness. This may be where Lomberg gets his opportunity especially should Engelland not return. It would also be good to have some scoring ability to go along with Jankowski if he is indeed the 4th line C maybe GG gives himself a few options for different opponents.

Shinkaruk, Jankowski, Versteeg

Lomberg, Jankowski, Hathaway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I'm not convinced we need to much size factor from that 4th LW position or more effective checking and toughness. This may be where Lomberg gets his opportunity especially should Engelland not return. It would also be good to have some scoring ability to go along with Jankowski if he is indeed the 4th line C maybe GG gives himself a few options for different opponents.

Shinkaruk, Jankowski, Versteeg

Lomberg, Jankowski, Hathaway

 

Interesting.

I have been preaching a more effective 4th line, not just a grinder line.  I think in today's NHL, you need a 4th line that can play against any other team's lines.  Not necessarily score on them, but keep the puck out at least.  Brouwer was not a good 4th line player, nor was Bouma.  Stajan was pretty good on the PK, and played well enough in the regular season, but got buried in the playoffs.

 

I don't want to build a team to play against the Ducks, but you have to be have a 4th line that can handle teams with depth.  You shouldn't have to play Monahan's line against Getzlaf or Kessler, if you have last change.  They did okay driving the play, but got scored on way too much.  Maybe a combo of an ineffective D pairing with them, or maybe it was a weak goalie, but we have to do better.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Interesting.

I have been preaching a more effective 4th line, not just a grinder line.  I think in today's NHL, you need a 4th line that can play against any other team's lines.  Not necessarily score on them, but keep the puck out at least.  Brouwer was not a good 4th line player, nor was Bouma.  Stajan was pretty good on the PK, and played well enough in the regular season, but got buried in the playoffs.

 

I don't want to build a team to play against the Ducks, but you have to be have a 4th line that can handle teams with depth.  You shouldn't have to play Monahan's line against Getzlaf or Kessler, if you have last change.  They did okay driving the play, but got scored on way too much.  Maybe a combo of an ineffective D pairing with them, or maybe it was a weak goalie, but we have to do better.  

 

 

The more important piece for our team is to keep perfecting the systems GG wants in play and for BT to get the type of players required. I look at this offseason as an opportunity to make some significant improvements in some key areas. Goaltending is wide open for both positions, we need 4 defensemen and depending on what changes GG wants for forward lines we could see some trades and acquisitions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

I don't want to build a team to play against the Ducks,

 

 

i still say thats exactly what you do, but I think we are saying the same thing .

Let me clarify.. im not saying a team beat UP the ducks.. but a team that consistently beats them.

Yes you need some toughness in there , but to beat them you need speed.. you need attack from all 4 lines, if they shut down your stars you need guys like (currently) Bouma, Stajan, Brouwer, Backlunds line.. to make them pay for it 

It starts in goal.. they are going to generate enough quality chances , they cant have the easy ones

Look at Edmonton , they're up because a) theyre getting the goaltending , and B) when they shut down the McDavids etc, guys like Letestu are making them pay for it

 

Just think back.. by 1984 we had a legitimate contender.. but we'd hit the playoffs and Edmonton would stuff us..badly..  so we built a team to beat Edmonton .. guys like Otto, Kromm,  Tonelli.. and we finally got past them in 1986.. what happened ?. we made the finals..because by being able to beat Edmonton , we were now beating everybody else too.

 

We're not targeting a basement team that happens to own us.. this is a legitimate perennial SC contender that owns us..  target them, beat them and rest will happen 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^^

 

I'm saying you don't build a team to win against the Ducks.  They are not a model of a winning team.  You build your team against the league as a whole.  We weren't dominated by them; we lost because our depth and goaltending failed us.  Our 4th line would have been a healthy scratch on the Ducks.  Our 3rd pair was not sufficient.  

 

I like the move away from the stretch pass being used as a strategy for moving the puck.  I hate the present use of the bump back on the PP.  It's so overused, not just by us.  Sure, Johnny may be able to gain the zone, but why isn't he within 10 feet of the guy with the puck?  Teams adjust to that if it happens more than once, because they know it's coming.

 

I think the zone exits need work.  Not sure if it was personnel or design.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

^^^^^

 

I'm saying you don't build a team to win against the Ducks.  They are not a model of a winning team.  You build your team against the league as a whole.  We weren't dominated by them; we lost because our depth and goaltending failed us.  Our 4th line would have been a healthy scratch on the Ducks.  Our 3rd pair was not sufficient.  

 

I like the move away from the stretch pass being used as a strategy for moving the puck.  I hate the present use of the bump back on the PP.  It's so overused, not just by us.  Sure, Johnny may be able to gain the zone, but why isn't he within 10 feet of the guy with the puck?  Teams adjust to that if it happens more than once, because they know it's coming.

 

I think the zone exits need work.  Not sure if it was personnel or design.  

 

 

ok let me just rephrse and say .. until we consistently beat the Ducks.. we're not wining anything 

 

if you want to go about Holistically and target the entire league great .. but even if we build a powerhouse that makes Pittsburgh jealous,   it means nothing if we cant beat the ducks.. and until they change this silly playoff format , we'll likely be on a path to play them every single year .. hoping that somebody else takes  them out for us, is not a good gameplan to win a cup..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

 

 

ok let me just rephrse and say .. until we consistently beat the Ducks.. we're not wining anything 

 

if you want to go about Holistically and target the entire league great .. but even if we build a powerhouse that makes Pittsburgh jealous,   it means nothing if we cant beat the ducks.. and until they change this silly playoff format , we'll likely be on a path to play them every single year .. hoping that somebody else takes  them out for us, is not a good gameplan to win a cup..

 

Simple solution.  Get a goalie. :)

 

You build a team to clinch the playoffs early, and you have better chances of not facing the Ducks in round 1.  But the point is that winning or having the chance to win every game is the goal.  Devising a gameplan for playing the Ducks comes with having that team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

it means nothing if we cant beat the ducks.. and until they change this silly playoff format , we'll likely be on a path to play them every single year .. hoping that somebody else takes  them out for us, is not a good gameplan to win a cup..

 

That's what we did in the 80's, except the Ducks were the Oilers. The only time we beat them was when Steve Smith was working as a double agent, and the year that we won the cup - the Kings took them out in the first round. Then we swept the Kings. 

 

Love. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Simple solution.  Get a goalie. :)

 

You build a team to clinch the playoffs early, and you have better chances of not facing the Ducks in round 1.  But the point is that winning or having the chance to win every game is the goal.  Devising a gameplan for playing the Ducks comes with having that team.

I think this playoff showed how close we are to being serious contenders. BT has his extension now so he can get back to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.