• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

The ****ing Off-Season Thread 2017

number17 said:
Thanks for the stats ... that is sure good to know.

While I agree Hainsey was one of the under-rated D, he is 36, and if anything we've learned over the past few years is at this age defensemen at this age can totally fall off the cliff over 1 summer. I still don't like the signing, but at least I have reasons to believe maybe Lou can prove me wrong.
Click to expand...

I know that the easy go to here is Robidas...but Robidas stopped being good a few years before we signed him. Then he broke. Then we signed him. He then went from Neutral usage elsewhere into tougher usage in Toronto and was both terrible and broken at the same time.

Hainsey has been the guy we brought Robidas here to be, while Robidas hadn't been that guy for a few years already before we brought him in....and Hainsey isn't broken. Robidas might have been serviceable here had he not been broken already.
 
It would seem there's some disconnect between how hainsey looks vs his numbers. Sort of a marincin situation.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 
Hainsey did look darn good in the playoffs. No way the Pens expected him to play quite that much when they made that trade. He went above and beyond what was asked and delivered.
Robidas broke both legs. I don't think you can compare the two.
 
That D is the worst in NHL history for a team to win a cup. If Hainsy was that horrible, they would not have won it all.
Seriously, try to find any cup winning D worse than that in history. The Leafs D is far better.
 
JackBurton said:
That D is the worst in NHL history for a team to win a cup. If Hainsy was that horrible, they would not have won it all.
Seriously, try to find any cup winning D worse than that in history. The Leafs D is far better.
Click to expand...

The Canes

F Kaberle (32) - Hedican (35)
Wallin (30) - Ward (33)
Wesley (37) - Commodore (26)


Old, slow (other than Hedican), untalented. Hainsey would be the #1 in that group
 
Aberdeen said:
Habspatrol thought he was terrible.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Hainsey was used with Maatta as the Pens match up pair and struggled at times with premium match ups. Hainsey isn't the greatest puck moving defender on the planet so when up against heavy forechecks by talented top 6 players, he had some issues at times during the playoffs.

Pittsburgh used him the same way Chicago uses Hjalmarsson...and he isn't Hjalmarsson. Even if he ends up as our 2nd pair RHD, he'll have a high end puck mover to carry his water playing with him (Maatta isn't that guy) and he won't be getting elite level usage either (though I think Babs will use him to ease Zaitsev's match up load a bit)...and he'll be walking into a system he's familiar with.
 
Think of Hainsey as a less physical, but significantly better version of Roman Polak who can be trusted to play against good competition and anchor your top PK unit, while being able to play up and down your blueline on all 3 pairings, on either side as necessary. He's basically a swiss army knife for our blueline.
 
Habsy said:
You guys are seriously overvaluing Hainsey. He's serviceable sure but wow.
Click to expand...

we are?

he's a 3rd pairing guy who has habitually played top 4 minutes on other teams. that is a big upgrade on Hunlak. who's calling him more than that?

Should be similar to the impact Boyle had on the 4th line last season replacing smith/gauthier. When you go from garbage to servicable it's a nice improvement.
 
JackBurton said:
Hainsey did look darn good in the playoffs. No way the Pens expected him to play quite that much when they made that trade. He went above and beyond what was asked and delivered.
Robidas broke both legs. I don't think you can compare the two.
Click to expand...

Really? He had one really good offensive game in the finals... but otherwise he was atrocious with the puck in his zone.

He's alright positionally while defending the rush... but if he has the puck on his stick and anyone pressuring him at all and it's a guaranteed turnover.
 
JackBurton said:
That D is the worst in NHL history for a team to win a cup. If Hainsy was that horrible, they would not have won it all.
Seriously, try to find any cup winning D worse than that in history. The Leafs D is far better.
Click to expand...

I'm having a hard time following your logic here. It was the worst D of all time... so that proves that one of the members of that worst defense was good?
 
I don’t understand why people keep calling Hainsey a 3rd pairing guy when he's never been a 3rd pairing guy.
 
Habspatrol said:
Really? He had one really good offensive game in the finals... but otherwise he was atrocious with the puck in his zone.

He's alright positionally while defending the rush... but if he has the puck on his stick and anyone pressuring him at all and it's a guaranteed turnover.
Click to expand...

ok now how did Alzner and Emelin look?
 
i mean, i respect your opinion and all, but he compares well in every respect to players used in similar roles but who cost much more - alzner russell emelin methot etc.

we just paid him the same as girardi got paid, and hainsey has always been far better.
 
zeke said:
i mean, i respect your opinion and all, but he compares well in every respect to players used in similar roles but who cost much more - alzner russell emelin methot etc.

we just paid him the same as girardi got paid, and hainsey has always been far better.
Click to expand...

I don't know if there are stats to back it up but I just know that he turned the puck over in his zone a lot. He was often hemmed into his zone.
 
the whole team was, from what i watched. as a top pair guy in the toughest matchups i'm sure he was overwhelmed at times. that's not a role you want him in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top