Philly Interested In Halak

[jl-1]

How come Brodeur happen to blank teams with snipers on their roster, then ?

You saw Biron's save as mistakes or misses from our forwards, and I saw them as saves. There is our disagreement. We should leave to that. This conversation is going nowhere.

Because we made Biron look like Brodeur doesn't make him Brodeur. We see it this year again.

[gracie12]

And I'm not expecting or even asking you to agree. It doesn't change the fact. During regular season, you face good teams and bad teams. The intensity level isn't the same as everybody here could attest. A sniper will find the back of the net on a scoring opportunity in those situations instead of finding the goalie's logo, the goal post or miss the net all together. Agree or not, it's irrelevant in my opinion, in all due respect.

Its sort of off topic, but to continue this thinking: has anyone else noticed how well Tanguay and Koivu seem to "finish" for each other? These 2 work together so well you almost dont need a "finisher" on that line (especially not with lats there for some garbage goals. I could see 35-35-25 for goals for each of them this season if things keep up the way they have

[animerules1x3]

Because we made Biron look like Brodeur doesn't make him Brodeur. We see it this year again.

We didn't make him look like Brodeur, he made it himself. See, that's where we won't ever agree. And everything else is just related to that.

[jl-1]

We didn't make him look like Brodeur, he made it himself. See, that's where we won't ever agree. And everything else is just related to that.

Yes I guess it boils down to that. If a shooter has 3 feet of the net to shoot at with the goalie out of position, one can see a shot saved by the goalie instead of a shot directed in the net. I say that a natural goals' scorer will more often than not find the back of the net in such circumstances.

[leafsbaby08]

Goalies aren't worth much on the market, even good ones. I think BG is perfectly content having a goaltending tandem that other GMs are starving for. If Price goes down (god forbid), we still have a goalie who's better than Nittywhateverhis name is, Denis, Desjardins.. It's gonna have to be some kinda offer for BG to move on this.

[animerules1x3]

Yes I guess it boils down to that. If a shooter has 3 feet of the net to shoot at with the goalie out of position, one can see a shot saved by the goalie instead of a shot directed in the net. I say that a natural goals' scorer will more often than not find the back of the net in such circumstances.

It is possible, but what is also possible, is that a top-notch goalie tandem, and a not-so-porous defense is worth more in the playoffs than a sniper up front.

Besides, we have a few 30-goal scorers there. Kovalev is one, Andy Kosty should be one (but his injury might have pushed this cap a season), and Tanguay looks like one when he's red-hot like now. Question : what is better : 3 30-goal scorers with plenty of quality supporting cast, or 1 50-goal scorer with scrubs ?

I believe a more complete team without a said sniper will survive longer in the playoffs than the opposite. But hey, you have the right to your opinion too, JL. Just because we don't agree doesn't mean we have to hate each other

[SteenIsThaFuture]

It is possible, but what is also possible, is that a top-notch goalie tandem, and a not-so-porous defense is worth more in the playoffs than a sniper up front.

But hey, you have the right to your opinion too, JL. Just because we don't agree doesn't mean we have to hate each other

Screw that, wheres the fun then? Cmon politics, violence, drama more more more

[RicochetII]

It is possible, but what is also possible, is that a top-notch goalie tandem, and a not-so-porous defense is worth more in the playoffs than a sniper up front.

Besides, we have a few 30-goal scorers there. Kovalev is one, Andy Kosty should be one (but his injury might have pushed this cap a season), and Tanguay looks like one when he's red-hot like now. Question : what is better : 3 30-goal scorers with plenty of quality supporting cast, or 1 50-goal scorer with scrubs ?

I believe a more complete team without a said sniper will survive longer in the playoffs than the opposite. But hey, you have the right to your opinion too, JL. Just because we don't agree doesn't mean we have to hate each other

I'm not going to go into the 40 vs 20 goal scorer debate again, we've already agreed to disagree on that front. I'd like to point out though, that if we can acquire a 40 or 50 goal scorer at the point we are at now, they wouldn't be playing with scrubs. I know some trade ideas dig too deeply into our lineup and I agree with you in respect to those ideas.

We have a mountain of talent, if we remove one stone in order to put the flag on top, it is worth it. If we cut the mountain in half, the flag on top isn't worth it.

[tony1234]

You're right, I haven't seen any other team play and am totally unaware of what a big center can do.

First of all, we have a "big center," Robert Lang is big. Second of all, again, I didn't say it's not helpful it's just overrated.

You can win a cup without a big center, ask the Red Wings. If it was as absolutely critical as you seem to want to imply, then the Wings wouldn't have won the cup, end of discussion.

End of discussion ? Too bad.

It won't give me the chance to point out what a big center does for you.

We saw it last night. The goal Minny scored was because our small center knew he wasn't big enough to pin his man on the boards behind the net.

Instead Pleks just waved his stick around at the general direction of the puck. If we had a big center that goal is not scored.

Since you are not talking anymore maybe someone else will take up the debate ?

[jl-1]

It is possible, but what is also possible, is that a top-notch goalie tandem, and a not-so-porous defense is worth more in the playoffs than a sniper up front.

We already have that and in the proposal I made, we'd still have it.

Besides, we have a few 30-goal scorers there. Kovalev is one, Andy Kosty should be one (but his injury might have pushed this cap a season), and Tanguay looks like one when he's red-hot like now. Question : what is better : 3 30-goal scorers with plenty of quality supporting cast, or 1 50-goal scorer with scrubs ?

First off, Kovalev scored 30 last year. Will he repeat? Maybe, maybe not. Second, Andrei has never scored 30 so let's give him a chance to reach that goal before calling him that. Third, although he's having a great start of the season and I'm thrilled about it, the fact remains that Tanguay's career high is 29 goals while with the Avalanche. He may or may not reach that, it's a long season. Last, in the proposal I made, I don't think that he'd be playing with scrubs. So before affirming what's better, we'd have to deal with facts.

I'm not going to go into the 40 vs 20 goal scorer debate again, we've already agreed to disagree on that front. I'd like to point out though, that if we can acquire a 40 or 50 goal scorer at the point we are at now, they wouldn't be playing with scrubs. I know some trade ideas dig too deeply into our lineup and I agree with you in respect to those ideas.

We have a mountain of talent, if we remove one stone in order to put the flag on top, it is worth it. If we cut the mountain in half, the flag on top isn't worth it.

Well said. I agree.

[animerules1x3]

End of discussion ? Too bad.

It won't give me the chance to point out what a big center does for you.

We saw it last night. The goal Minny scored was because our small center knew he wasn't big enough to pin his man on the boards behind the net.

Instead Pleks just waved his stick around at the general direction of the puck. If we had a big center that goal is not scored.

Since you are not talking anymore maybe someone else will take up the debate ?

Nope, since everyone is camping on their positions, it really is the end of the discussion. Sorry, mate.

We already have that and in the proposal I made, we'd still have it.

What, you mean Niittymaki ? Seriously ? This guy is an average number 2 with consistency troubles whereas Halak is a potential number 1 signed to a cheaper contract. We'd weaken by trading the two, thus no longer having a top-notching goaltending tandem.

In any case, we shall see what need BG will try to fill by deadline time. My money is on a number 4 D and not on another centre as he already made the acquisition of one. You can place your bet on whatever you want.

[tony1234]

Go look at Detroit's lineup at centre. This small centre myth is what it is, a myth. Nuff said.

Another point I would like to make about Detroit's centers, ya they are smaller than some.

Datsyuk is their best, and he is small, I love Saku and pleks, but neither are a Datsyuk !!!

[roy_133]

It won't give me the chance to point out what a big center does for you.

Again, I didn't say a big center didn't do anything, I've even said yeah it's helpful, but it's not impossible to win without one, and you're vastly overrating the need for one. So really, you're not debating any of my points, I said you're overrating it and you can win without one, like Detroit did. The fact that Detroit did it without a big center, proves it can be done, that ends the discussion. It's doable, there's no argument.

If you want to reply and say "Well one time i saw a small guy get muscled off the puck," then go ahead. You can win without a big center. It's been done.

We have more pressing needs right now, getting another big center would be nice if his SKILL level was that of a player deserving to be on this roster (and yes, Jeff Carter certainly does fall into that category) but shoring up our back end is absolutely mandatory if we want to consider playing games into late May.

With that being said, Jeff Carter is a good hockey player, and he'd be a good hockey player at 6', if a good hockey player is available and the deal makes total sense then I'd be happy.

[tony1234]

In any case, we shall see what need BG will try to fill by deadline time. My money is on a number 4 D and not on another centre as he already made the acquisition of one. You can place your bet on whatever you want.

If you are just thinking about a playoff run then getting just a top four dman makes sense, but there is a future to think about as well.

Bob may just make a deal sometime for a center.

We have Koivu who may be gone UFA. As well there is the fact he won't play forever.

We have Lang who may be gone UFA.

We have a couple of kids who could be good replacements, but are not sure things.

Carter is a sure thing replacment, and if we could get him, you gotta do it.

[roy_133]

Another point I would like to make about Detroit's centers, ya they are smaller than some.

Datsyuk is their best, and he is small, I love Saku and pleks, but neither are a Datsyuk !!!

No one is comparing them to Datsyuk, only using the Red Wings as an example to dispel this prehistoric notion that you simply CAN NOT win a cup without a center over 6'4 who lumbers up and down the ice.

[animerules1x3]

Another point I would like to make about Detroit's centers, ya they are smaller than some.

Datsyuk is their best, and he is small, I love Saku and pleks, but neither are a Datsyuk !!!

The point is not their talent. The point is the size. Size isn't everything. While you people are quick to point out how we cannot win the cup with smallish centres, and call that ' fact ' , you ignore the inconvenient truth that the Wings just won it throw raw talent alone, with a bunch of small centres.

Besides, we were defeated by the Flyers, who, with their big centres, went to be defeated by a more skilled team than them in semifinals.

It is very possible to win with small centres, as long as they are skilled, and as long as the team is deep enough at all positions to adapt to many playstyles on their way to the cup.

It is not the small centres who lost us, as Koivu was our best player in the playoffs, and Plekanec was decent, while not as good as in the season. It was a lack of depth overall (which BG adressed this summer), and Price's ordinary performance. We dominated most of the games against the Flyers. I remember how much I felt stolen at the end of the series, as I thought we deserved better than a 5-games knockout.

But we will see again this year, as the Wings and the Habs are two of the favourite contenders, with small centres.

[animerules1x3]

If you are just thinking about a playoff run then getting just a top four dman makes sense, but there is a future to think about as well.

Bob may just make a deal sometime for a center.

We have Koivu who may be gone UFA. As well there is the fact he won't play forever.

We have Lang who may be gone UFA.

We have a couple of kids who could be good replacements, but are not sure things.

Carter is a sure thing replacment, and if we could get him, you gotta do it.

No. Because the Flyers have no reason to give him to us for cheap. And we have no reason to pay a lot for him.

BG will not overpay to get a third line centre who is too good for the job we'd need someone to do.

Lang will be gone, but Koivu will stay, and Maxwell is more than ideal to take the light duties of a third scoring line next year, behind veterans to groom him, just like Plekanec began. No need for a 5M player to fill such a sweater.

To get a player you don't need, and to give plenty of depth to get him isn't constructive, as you open your wings and defense, plus in this proposal, you lose a valuable backup goaltender. You get stronger in one place, and weaker at every other position. And then, if your starter is injured, and you are forced to use Niitymaki for 20 games, you'll bite your tongue for doing the mistake.

Hopefully, BG is more conservative than that.

[tony1234]

Again, I didn't say a big center didn't do anything, I've even said yeah it's helpful, but it's not impossible to win without one, and you're vastly overrating the need for one. So really, you're not debating any of my points, I said you're overrating it and you can win without one, like Detroit did. The fact that Detroit did it without a big center, proves it can be done, that ends the discussion. It's doable, there's no argument.

If you want to reply and say "Well one time i saw a small guy get muscled off the puck," then go ahead. You can win without a big center. It's been done.

We have more pressing needs right now, getting another big center would be nice if his SKILL level was that of a player deserving to be on this roster (and yes, Jeff Carter certainly does fall into that category) but shoring up our back end is absolutely mandatory if we want to consider playing games into late May.

With that being said, Jeff Carter is a good hockey player, and he'd be a good hockey player at 6', if a good hockey player is available and the deal makes total sense then I'd be happy.

See. I am not thinking of a big center for a playoff run, although it would help.

I am saying a big center as a need for the future of this franchise, as I posted above, koivu will not play forever, and both him and Lang could be gone this summer. If we could bring in a Carter to address this you do it.

And it wasn't one time I saw a guy muscled off the puck, it is a constant issue with this club. Size down the middle makes a huge difference, especially when that size is on your top 2 lines. Again, my concern is not the playoffs this year, it is about the years coming. We need a center to take over for Saku, and I want that guy to be BIG. That is all I was saying.

[tony1234]

No. Because the Flyers have no reason to give him to us for cheap. And we have no reason to pay a lot for him.

BG will not overpay to get a third line centre who is too good for the job we'd need someone to do.

Lang will be gone, but Koivu will stay, and Maxwell is more than ideal to take the light duties of a third scoring line next year, behind veterans to groom him, just like Plekanec began. No need for a 5M player to fill such a sweater.

To get a player you don't need, and to give plenty of depth to get him isn't constructive, as you open your wings and defense, plus in this proposal, you lose a valuable backup goaltender. You get stronger in one place, and weaker at every other position. And then, if your starter is injured, and you are forced to use Niitymaki for 20 games, you'll bite your tongue for doing the mistake.

Hopefully, BG is more conservative than that.

Do you honestly believe Bob was trying to Sundin to be our third line center ?

He wanted him because he is skilled, and HUGE and would be our first line center !!!

Our guys are good, but are too small. koivu was our best player, but if Bob had managed to get Mats for the playoff drive like he tried, we would have been in the finals, not the Pens.

[roy_133]

See. I am not thinking of a big center for a playoff run, although it would help.

I am saying a big center as a need for the future of this franchise, as I posted above, koivu will not play forever, and both him and Lang could be gone this summer. If we could bring in a Carter to address this you do it.

And it wasn't one time I saw a guy muscled off the puck, it is a constant issue with this club. Size down the middle makes a huge difference, especially when that size is on your top 2 lines. Again, my concern is not the playoffs this year, it is about the years coming. We need a center to take over for Saku, and I want that guy to be BIG. That is all I was saying.

I'm not even on a totally different side then you really, what I picked up was that you were trying to say it's impossible to win without a big center, which it isn't.

Sure, Saku needs to be replaced at some point, but he's not exactly 37 or anything, he still has a few good years left. Like I said, if 2 guys are of equal or very close skill level and hockey sense, one being big the other small I'd take the big, with that being said I don't think having a big guy is so important that you cast someone smaller, but better all around, aside to get the big center.

I'd love Jeff Carter, but you have to ask is the potential price worth it? The guy is being underrated here IMO, I think he has 40 goal potential and we'd have to screw ourselves for Philly to send him here, considering we're both young, up and coming teams that could meet a lot come playoff time over the next little while.

[flames4eva]

As this is the Halak to Philly thread... maybe we should consider that Halak may be going elsewhere (Atlanta maybe?) and then the talk of Carter to Montreal for Halak is moot.

[animerules1x3]

Do you honestly believe Bob was trying to Sundin to be our third line center ?

He wanted him because he is skilled, and HUGE and would be our first line center !!!

Our guys are good, but are too small. koivu was our best player, but if Bob had managed to get Mats for the playoff drive like he tried, we would have been in the finals, not the Pens.

Bob wasn't bringing Sundin to be our third centre, but he wasn't bringing him to replace Koivu long-term, either. He was trying to acquire a centre to who he could make minimal commitment, like 1-2 years, because he has young centres coming in from within the organization, thus, for free (of players, and cheap, of money).

Carter isn't needed long-term either, because we have long-term plans already.

So, acquiring him makes little sense since we would pay a lot to stray from the long-term plan in place.

[tony1234]

I'm not even on a totally different side then you really, what I picked up was that you were trying to say it's impossible to win without a big center, which it isn't.

Sure, Saku needs to be replaced at some point, but he's not exactly 37 or anything, he still has a few good years left. Like I said, if 2 guys are of equal or very close skill level and hockey sense, one being big the other small I'd take the big, with that being said I don't think having a big guy is so important that you cast someone smaller, but better all around, aside to get the big center.

I'd love Jeff Carter, but you have to ask is the potential price worth it? The guy is being underrated here IMO, I think he has 40 goal potential and we'd have to screw ourselves for Philly to send him here, considering we're both young, up and coming teams that could meet a lot come playoff time over the next little while.

No, I agree, Philly won't trade this guy, or if they were willing, the deal could kill us.

It is one of those things though, if available, no harm in checking it out.

Bob wasn't bringing Sundin to be our third centre, but he wasn't bringing him to replace Koivu long-term, either. He was trying to acquire a centre to who he could make minimal commitment, like 1-2 years, because he has young centres coming in from within the organization, thus, for free (of players, and cheap, of money).

Carter isn't needed long-term either, because we have long-term plans already.

So, acquiring him makes little sense since we would pay a lot to stray from the long-term plan in place.

We have long term plans in place ?

I must have missed the meeting !!!

We do have some good kids in the minors, Like Maxwell, but none are a sure bet.

Right now I would take Carter over anyone of them.

[animerules1x3]

No, I agree, Philly won't trade this guy, or if they were willing, the deal could kill us.

It is one of those things though, if available, no harm in checking it out.

We have long term plans in place ?

I must have missed the meeting !!!

We do have some good kids in the minors, Like Maxwell, but none are a sure bet.

Right now I would take Carter over anyone of them.

Ben Maxwell is a surefire NHL player. You mustn't have seen him play. He's a second-line centre will decent size and neat skills. The only question is : when ? At the rate he is performing in the AHL right now, he's ahead of Pacioretty in his development for now.

Ryan White and Oliver Fortier are two-way centres for an eventual third line. White has possible second-line skills (lower-end though), and he has plenty of size.

Brock Trotter is a second-liner in development too.

And we need only one of the pack as Pleks and Saku will be here for the next several years.

Right now, we don't need another centre, as Lang is doing the job he's asked and we just traded to acquire him at a very reasonable price. So, we don't need Carter, even if we could use him. Just as I don't need a ferrari even though I could have fun with it. Need and luxury are two distinct things.

Granted, we have no Carter-like centre coming, but we have plenty of young centres with good potential coming, and they, unlike Carter, are ours, so that we don't need to bother about getting ***** in a deal to acquire a centre.

[tony1234]

Ben Maxwell is a surefire NHL player. You mustn't have seen him play. He's a second-line centre will decent size and neat skills. The only question is : when ? At the rate he is performing in the AHL right now, he's ahead of Pacioretty in his development for now.

Ryan White and Oliver Fortier are two-way centres for an eventual third line. White has possible second-line skills (lower-end though), and he has plenty of size.

Brock Trotter is a second-liner in development too.

And we need only one of the pack as Pleks and Saku will be here for the next several years.

Right now, we don't need another centre, as Lang is doing the job he's asked and we just traded to acquire him at a very reasonable price. So, we don't need Carter, even if we could use him. Just as I don't need a ferrari even though I could have fun with it. Need and luxury are two distinct things.

Granted, we have no Carter-like centre coming, but we have plenty of young centres with good potential coming, and they, unlike Carter, are ours, so that we don't need to bother about getting ***** in a deal to acquire a centre.

All those kids are great to have, but we have always had young centers in the minors with potential.

Carter is a verifiable commodity, and i suggest he is a NUMBER 1 center commodity.

The best we got is Maxwell as far as I have been reading, but with his injury history is he a sure thing ?

The rest by your analisys are second and third liners. I believe that when Saku leaves, this Carter guy would (if we had him) very quickly push Plekanecs down to number two center. I could be not evaluating the situation properly, I am not a professional !!!

But I very honestly feel we really need to find a bonafide number 1 quickly. Just my opinion.