PDA

View Full Version : Updates and Rumours from around the League



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 [66] 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156

teeds
10-01-2011, 04:49 PM
And sorry to tell you Ian, you cannot skate worth a shit, and your impressive positioning skills only make up for some of that. On top of that, you are a midget,and Detroit is in for a fight just to make the playoffs this year. They are DONE.

teeds
10-01-2011, 04:53 PM
And once again, Ottawa has employed a designer who obviously turned off all the lights and waited for a solar eclipse before coming up with that design. Truly a HALL of SHAME jersey. Maybe, just maybe the ugliest uniform of all time in NHL history. And Ottawa has claimed that prize before. Just heinous. Pizza Pizza.

corksens
10-01-2011, 05:00 PM
And once again, Ottawa has employed a designer who obviously turned off all the lights and waited for a solar eclipse before coming up with that design. Truly a HALL of SHAME jersey. Maybe, just maybe the ugliest uniform of all time in NHL history. And Ottawa has claimed that prize before. Just heinous. Pizza Pizza.Considering everyone, except you, has universally been impressed with that jersey, I'll just brush you off.

Montana
10-01-2011, 05:53 PM
No one plays the victim quite like teeds....

Leafin'
10-01-2011, 06:00 PM
The color scheme on the jersey is nice, but the front logo is boring and dull. They couldve come up with something a little bit more creative.

corksens
10-01-2011, 06:04 PM
But it's a heritage jersey...

Bleedsblue&white
10-01-2011, 06:04 PM
Generally, I hate the horizontal stripe look, makes me think of an ugly high-school rugby jersey...but somehow this works.
Except that the O is too close to a zero.

Leafin'
10-01-2011, 06:15 PM
Not to take anything away from it being a "Heritage" jersey, just that they couldve come up with something a little bit more creative than the letter "O".

leafman101
10-01-2011, 06:21 PM
The zero logo is fitting IMO.

corksens
10-01-2011, 06:54 PM
All of your jerseys feature a leaf...yet an 'O' is boring.

Gotcha.

Leafin'
10-01-2011, 07:08 PM
I didnt make mention of the leafs logo. Not sure what your argument is when all i mentioned was that the logo looks bland. If they had come up with something more creative, my comment wouldnt stand.

Childish.

corksens
10-01-2011, 07:10 PM
It's not supposed to be creative or new, it's a heritage jersey meant to be dedicated to the old Ottawa hockey teams.

corksens
10-01-2011, 07:11 PM
I didnt make mention of the leafs logo. Not sure what your argument is when all i mentioned was that the logo looks bland. If they had come up with something more creative, my comment wouldnt stand.

Childish.I know you didn't make mention of the Leafs logo. Considering your comment was that the logo was bland, I pointed to the leaf on the Maple Leafs jersey. It doesn't get more bland than that...but it works.

Not everything has to look like the Minnesota Wild jersey.

Volcanologist
10-01-2011, 07:15 PM
http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/Ottawa-pest-Chris-Neil-s-ex-teammate-on-covering?urn=nhl-281632


"I heard about it," McGrattan said of Neil's actions. "That's typical Chris Neil. I had to protect that guy for three years when I was there. He'd do that and I'd have to fight all his battles for him the next time we'd play a team after he'd do something stupid like that. It doesn't surprise me."

"That's the way he does it," McGrattan said. "He'll do something where he knows he'll get kicked out of the game and won't have to come back and fight anybody. I've been around him long enough to know he does that. Then I'm the one who usually has to fight his battles the next time. It's typical."

corksens
10-01-2011, 07:19 PM
Huh? Why are you posting an article from last November?

teeds
10-01-2011, 07:26 PM
Universally accepted? By who, every homer in Ottawa? That HUGE Zero is just sooooooooo fitting. Look at the expressions on your millionaire players, they could barely contain their disgust.

As usual, Ottawa is in its own world on this one. And with complete sincerity, unless Spezza and Alfredsson play the hockey of their lives, I don't see how that jersey will finish anything but last place overall.

corksens
10-01-2011, 07:30 PM
That's your insult? Everyone knows the Sens will be fighting for last overall.

Leafin'
10-01-2011, 07:37 PM
A logo with script is quite less bland than a logo with an enormous 'O'.

In all honesty, i dont even mind the Sens logo as is. Just that they couldve done a better job on a heritage jersey.

Just my opinion afterall.

teeds
10-01-2011, 07:47 PM
I will leave being adept at being negative and obnoxious to other posters, as much as possible. If I had my way, this board would be ALL ABOUT sharing, communication and be totally devoid of attack. But I guess in your particular case, I sort of lost my discipline. I will try not to participate next time.

JaysCyYoung
10-01-2011, 08:24 PM
I think Ottawa's new jerseys are absolutely fantastic personally, but then again I like anything historic. Simplicity, solid colours, and showing respect and tribute to past teams in their city.

Hell, they look like the jerseys King Clancy wore with the original Ottawa Senators before he became a Leaf:

http://www.goaliesarchive.com/senators/goalie/clancy.jpg

teeds
10-01-2011, 08:46 PM
I lived in Ottawa and watched the 67's a ton live. Their jerseys made me dizzy, just doesn't look like a hockey uniform. Reminds me of a frickin bee.

JaysCyYoung
10-01-2011, 09:06 PM
Most early hockey uniforms looked like that. In fact, they're more like a real hockey jersey than anything we have today.

teeds
10-02-2011, 08:07 AM
True enough. And like you, I love historic hockey moments. A friend of mine is excellent friends with Norm Ullmans son, who himself was a fine hockey player who played in Europe. And he goes out to dinner with Norm and his son, and barely talks to Norm all night.

Just because Norm said he was a Detroit fan first. Now Norm Ullman is one of the finest Leafs to ever don a uniform, and my buddy is a HUGE Leaf fan. Huge. And because of Norm being honest about his first love(Detroit) my buddy just completely shuns him. I give him shit all the time and beg him to have me out to dinner with them, so I can pester Norm all night long for stories about Gordie Howe, Terry Sawchuk etc...

I remember Red Kelly was dragged to watch one of my tennis matches at the Toronto Skating and Cricket Club by his daughter or niece, and I ran into him afterwards and he and I gleefully exchanged war stories for an hour before she dragged him off. I swear he was so happy to meet such a devoted history buff/fan. Such a nice guy was Red.

But most fans care only about today, and tomorrow. Its sorta sad in a way. History does end up repeating itself. And this latest sweater is testimony to that I guess.

BG
10-02-2011, 08:23 AM
The only thing better would be the inclusion of a few ruffles...

teeds
10-02-2011, 09:50 AM
Lol. That was funny. Me, I could care less about uniforms. I want constant improvements to the game. Shanahan eliminating head shots is outstanding in my opinion. I hope he gets around to no touch icing ASAP, its pathetic to see what happens to these poor guys when its a race to the puck. Its gotta be one of the most dangerous situations in pro sports. And its not necessary.

Bleedsblue&white
10-02-2011, 09:58 AM
I think it's kind of silly to say something looks because it has history.
Ugly is ugly.
Mind you, as I get older...I might start calling myself historic instead.

PlayerToBeNamedLater
10-10-2011, 01:29 PM
Bitching already starting



First came the accolades, now comes the backlash. Brendan Shanahan was widely praised for his strict sentencing in the preseason in an attempt to get players to cut down on the head shots. He also knew it wouldn't last. He knew there would be a controversial hit that would lead to criticism. He knew not every general manager would agree with his decisions on justice.

It didn't take long for that to happen. Right about the time James Wisniewski was suspended for 10 games and fined half a million dollars, the doubters started to surface.

"Columbus got shafted," one NHL source said after the Wisniewski suspension. "There's more to come."

This weekend, Minnesota's Pierre-Marc Bouchard was suspended for two games for high-sticking Matt Calvert in the face. Bouchard doesn't have a reputation as a dirty player, and he missed 110 games with a concussion as a result of a head shot. In a statement condemning the suspension, Bouchard's outspoken agent, Allan Walsh, also pointed out that Bouchard has just two major penalties in nine seasons.

"There is no one who supports ridding the game of headshots, blindside hits and dangerous hits from behind more than Pierre-Marc," Walsh wrote in a statement given to ESPN.com's Pierre LeBrun and others. "What occurred on the play in question last night was none of the above. The notion that Pierre-Marc Bouchard intentionally swung his stick into the face of an opponent is patently absurd. He's just not that kind of player."

Before the preseason, I chatted with St. Louis Blues general manager Doug Armstrong about Shanahan's mandate in his first season as the replacement for Colin Campbell. Armstrong paused for a second, saying he wanted to choose his words carefully.

"Shanny's job is to implement the rules that he's given by the competition committee and the managers," Armstrong said. "It's not to make up his own rules."

Shanahan's interpretation of the rulebook will surely be debated at the November general manager's meeting and, according to the Calgary Sun, some general managers aren't waiting that long. A small group already has filed a complaint with commissioner Gary Bettman.

"We wanted the bar raised, not doubled or tripled," a GM told the Sun this past weekend.

In Walsh's statement, he made a call for a panel to hand out suspensions rather than giving the power to just one person. Walsh isn't alone in that opinion. Another agent I spoke with last week suggested the same thing. He suggested a three-person panel on which a majority rule would determine the fines and suspension.

"The union picks a person, the league picks a person and those two people pick a third person," he suggested. "They can create a body of precedent. They have no agenda but to enforce the justice as mandated by the CBA, which is by both the league and the union."

It's another item to add to the growing agenda for CBA negotiations when Bettman and Donald Fehr meet in the spring.

MapleLeafBlueJayBoy
10-10-2011, 03:57 PM
I do not mind what Shanny is doing, quite frankly, it is long overdue.

Respect needs to be brought back into this game.

LeafGm
10-10-2011, 04:53 PM
As far as his client goes, Walsh is being a whiny little bitch. It doesn't really matter that PM Bouchard isn't a repeat offender or what the other guy did to piss him off. Intentionally clubbing someone in the face with the blade of your stick should get you suspended every time. Two games was light.

That being said, I do agree it's a bad idea to have all the power for NHL discipline in one guy's hands. It's a matter of public record that Colin Campbell was tremendously biased when it came to his son, or whatever team his son was playing for. And then I think Shanny's already demonstrated a Red Wings bias by suspending MacArthur for barely brushing one of them. So, I think a panel made up of a league representative, union rep and an independent party agreed to by both sides is actually a great idea to make sure that the most fair and balanced possible judgements are handed down.

leafman101
10-10-2011, 04:57 PM
Yeah, if you two hand a guy in the face you deserve to get suspended. I know he didn't mean to get him in the face, but he did. And a two hander to the hands is a suspendable offence too.

rated
10-10-2011, 05:40 PM
They wanted more harsh suspensions and they got it now they are whining its too strict ? bitch bitch bitch

Handling the people who are purposely going for head shots is easy to deal with. All that grey area inbetween though... the careless & wreckless plays that result in head shots, but not done with intention is the hard part. NHL needs to grind it into the players heads that those kind of wreckless plays arent acceptable and imo giving big suspensions for those kinds of hits is a good way to grind it into their heads. A 10 game suspension is nothing compared to a guy losing his career due to a concussion from a head shot.

PlayerToBeNamedLater
10-13-2011, 06:11 PM
UPDATE: A huge step forward.

Several sources report, including ESPN.com, that Sidney Crosby has been cleared for contact in practice.

"I'm cleared for full contact," Crosby said. "It's a good step in the right direction. We'll see how it goes in the next little bit."

However, getting his teammates to play rough with him may be a whole other issue.

"I might have to do something to get them to hit me," Crosby added. "Maybe I'll have to bump them a little bit and get them going. As close to a game situation as we can get it."

There still isn't a timetable for his return to game action with the Pittsburgh Penguins.

JaysCyYoung
10-13-2011, 11:55 PM
Fantastic news for the league. The NHL is a lot better with talents like Sidney Crosby healthy and entertaining the masses than without that's for certain.

Volcanologist
10-13-2011, 11:58 PM
Not to mention your FI pool team.

JaysCyYoung
10-14-2011, 12:12 AM
Well that's a corollary benefit too... ;)

da_next_kid
10-14-2011, 07:25 AM
Sid playing is a benefit to everybody, he is by far the best player in the NHL.

Bleedsblue&white
10-14-2011, 10:28 AM
You know...I'm glad he's okay and all, but this, "it's great he's back," and "this is great for hockey"...it's a little much;
If he doesn't play the Penguins lose points, which is good for, oh...EVERYBODY ELSE.
Him coming back could cost my team enough points to miss the playoffs.
Let's see how happy you are when he gets four points against you.

Leafyblue
10-14-2011, 10:59 AM
It's always more satisfying to beat the other team when they have their best guys in the lineup.

mbow30
10-14-2011, 11:03 AM
i think that for the state of the game it's very important for sidney crosby to be on the ice, playing, contributing, setting records and making his team into a contender rather that on the sidelines with a head injury.

Bleedsblue&white
10-14-2011, 11:10 AM
It's cause you're all lefty pinkos.

LeafGm
10-14-2011, 11:14 AM
Well, with or without Crosby, I think the Pens are a lock for home ice in the playoffs, so I don't really view Crosby returning as something that hurts the Leafs too much. Except, of course, in any games we play against the Pens.

number17
10-14-2011, 11:21 AM
Im not the biggest Crosby fan, but to sell a sports, you need a face to the game. And right now, Crosby is that face, so it is important for the NHL that he's back sooner than later.

All this can change IF Ovie actually starts acting like a star again on and off the ice ... not too long ago Ovie's rock star demeanor was a strong contrast to Crosby's quieter, more introvert style, but now Crosby's already got a SC and an Olympics gold medal in his collection, Ovie's still trying to get to the 3rd round for the first time.

Until Ovie picks it up, Crosby will be the face of the league.

Bleedsblue&white
10-14-2011, 11:22 AM
Except, of course, in any games we play against the Pens.

I'm playing around a little bit here, but I do believe the Leafs will be life and death to get in, and my guess is spots 7-11 are going to be within a few points of each other.

Goldust
10-22-2011, 04:56 PM
That would be a pretty poor stategy considering the Bruins have no chance at repeating unless they get another superhuman season from Thomas.

Bullshit.

Which playoff series do the Bruins not win without Thomas? For all the loose talk with respect to Timmy being "everything" to Boston, none of you can give an answer. The Montreal series? Price posted the higher sv% and was the better goalie according to Count. Philly? The Bruins swept that series by scores of 7-3, 3-2, 5-1 and 5-1. Tampa Bay? You could at least make an argument that Thomas was the difference here, but most would agree that there was little to choose between the two teams (I thought the B's were better in at least four of the games). Besides, Thomas produced a good-but-not-awesome .916 sv% in that series. Finally we have Vancouver. Considering the Bruins won their four games 4-0, 5-2, 4-0, and 8-1, it seems likely that a mere mortal could have led them to Lord Stanley.

The reality is that the Bruins won the Cup on the basis of a very strong team performance. This can be plainly seen in the fact that the Bruins finished top-3 in goals per game. Furthermore, this strong collective performance was punctuated by elite individual performances from players other than Thomas: Krejci, Seidenberg, Chara. While Thomas's aggregate stats and the fact that the Bruins needed 3 Game 7s to win lead many to believe that Thomas needed to be otherworldly for Boston to win the Prize, a more pertinent game-by-game analysis refutes this theory. When Boston won, they usually won big instead of relying on a superhuman Thomas to eke out a victory. (When they won narrowly, it was usually the case that the other goalie played nearly or equally as well). On the other hand, many of Thomas's most impressive statistical performances came on the back of 3 or 4 goal wins when that degree of excellence simply wasn't required (see the Philly series). These twin observations should give some perspective to those who are claiming that the Bruins' run started and ended with Thomas.

It is quite possible that the Bruins would have won the Cup with James Reimer in net. With a strong squad from top to bottom and some players who performed unexpectedly well, all Boston needed (like most teams) was a very good, not historically good, goalie to hold the fort. The fact that Thomas went above and beyond expectations does not warrant the opinion that the Bruins' Cup run was simply due to him. As I have demonstrated, Boston won it all because they were the best TEAM. End of story.

Pronger84
10-22-2011, 04:59 PM
Well, with or without Crosby, I think the Pens are a lock for home ice in the playoffs, so I don't really view Crosby returning as something that hurts the Leafs too much. Except, of course, in any games we play against the Pens.

I dont know if they're a lock for home ice but w/e, I agree though we shouldnt be worried about the pens (until it comes time to face them on the ice). The leafs are in stiff competiton for the last playoff spot and were competing with teams like Carolina/Rangers/Montreal. These are the three teams were fighting with for a spot, we need to be better then ALL those three teams and possibly hope one (or more) of the higher up teams falls to 9th or below...

PlayerToBeNamedLater
10-22-2011, 05:03 PM
Tim Thomas put together one of the best goaltending performances in the history of hockey and was by far the biggest factor in the Bruins cup win. You put Thomas on any number of teams, and that team wins the cup.

10/11:
With Thomas (938 SV%): 35-11-5
With Rask (918 SV%): 11-14-2


Funny, the Bruins sucked when they only got good goaltending from Rask, instead of superhuman goaltending from Thomas. They wouldn't have even made the playoffs, let alone with the cup, without Thomas.

Hoss
10-22-2011, 07:53 PM
Hey with the florida/canucks moves its interesting that Eklnd had a post earlier today saying that the Canucks will be getting Turris if they can complete a trade with Florida first. Hey... he seems to be right about the Florida part... maybe they will be now going after Turris.

Montana
10-22-2011, 08:51 PM
That's a hefty contract Vancouver took on in Booth (4 years, $17 million remaining)...

Fitzgerald#11
10-22-2011, 09:38 PM
Capitals maing a statment tonight wow

Fitzgerald#11
10-22-2011, 09:40 PM
and what a comeback for the Sens

oscarheyman
10-22-2011, 09:52 PM
Hey with the florida/canucks moves its interesting that Eklnd had a post earlier today saying that the Canucks will be getting Turris if they can complete a trade with Florida first. Hey... he seems to be right about the Florida part... maybe they will be now going after Turris.
Not impossible but will be difficult as the Canucks are pretty much at the cap limit right now (I suppose sending Hodgson to the AHL and putting Mason Raymond LITR [don't think he's been put on this yet] is an option). As Montana noted, a bit of risk by the Canucks taking on Booth's contract. Likely the reason they didn't give up alot to get him.

acescanuck
10-22-2011, 10:07 PM
Not totally off the wall to think that maybe Ballard could be involved going the other way for Turris.

JackBurton
10-22-2011, 11:49 PM
Not totally off the wall to think that maybe Ballard could be involved going the other way for Turris.

Phoenix isn't taking his contract.

number17
10-23-2011, 06:28 PM
2 teams may be looking to shake things up.

The Rangers, after dropping another game last night, had Tortz fuming after the game. He didn't answer ny question from reporters, just said "We sucked from top to bottom right now. That's all I want to say." If Tortz isn't replaced, they'll try a shakeup move. They have a few forwards I like, including Anisimov, Callahan.

And CBJ is another team, after losing the lead with only 1.5 min left, they remain winless.

Blueman
10-23-2011, 06:47 PM
Richards who?

mbow30
10-23-2011, 07:28 PM
would be hilarious if trotz didn't last the year after richards cited him as a reason for his interest in new york.

Artnes
10-23-2011, 07:28 PM
How long will it take before Carter demands a trade out of there. That big contract will be tough to move but there is no way he lasts more then 2 seasons if this keeps up

LeafGm
10-23-2011, 09:29 PM
would be hilarious if trotz didn't last the year after richards cited him as a reason for his interest in new york.
I'd have a good gut laugh about it. Signing a nine year contract somewhere because you like the coach they currently have is honestly one of the dumbest things I've heard of.

number17
10-23-2011, 09:48 PM
And Slat's legacy continues - phenomenal in signing big ticket UFA s, it's just the team still sucks.

JackBurton
10-23-2011, 09:53 PM
Richards has 9 years with a NMC..ouch. Slats will want to dump him within 24 months.

Richards best years are likely behind him.

Wayward DP
10-23-2011, 09:57 PM
The Rags will turn it around. Having Lundqvist gives them a chance to win every game, and Richards and Gaborik are too talented not to get going soon.

They do really miss Mark Staal though.

Metalleaf
10-23-2011, 10:53 PM
http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee152/Metalleaf24/cartoon.jpg

gilmour93forever
10-25-2011, 12:01 AM
With the emergence of Schneider (for a while now) what teams out there could Luongo be a possible destination for, if Vancouver wanted to be really ballsy and get some more good young pieces for him?

I can't help but think Vancouver and Tampa Bay make really good trading partners right now.

LeafGm
10-25-2011, 12:31 AM
With the emergence of Schneider (for a while now) what teams out there could Luongo be a possible destination for, if Vancouver wanted to be really ballsy and get some more good young pieces for him?

I can't help but think Vancouver and Tampa Bay make really good trading partners right now.
I doubt it. I don't see anyone touching that contract with a ten-foot pole.

acescanuck
10-25-2011, 12:34 AM
I doubt it. I don't see anyone touching that contract with a ten-foot pole.

This. Lu goes nowhere. Hes got a nmc, until year 5 where he can opt out. Year seven, a brief window opens where the team can trade him. We're stuck with him. Finis.

acescanuck
10-25-2011, 12:35 AM
My prediction is Schneider gets dealt at the draft. No reason to unload him before in the event that Lu gets hurt or shits the bed in the playoffs again.

Montana
10-25-2011, 01:09 AM
.919 SV% since joining the team, and Canucks fans consider themselves "stuck" with Luongo.




heh.

acescanuck
10-25-2011, 01:12 AM
.919 SV% since joining the team, and Canucks fans consider themselves "stuck" with Luongo.




heh.

We demand excellence. Nothing less. 82-0.

acescanuck
10-25-2011, 01:17 AM
In all seriousness, I'm convinced Luongo's issues are 100% mental related. He hasn't learned to shake off the "bad goal". Hence his annual struggles in the playoffs & October.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 08:51 AM
meh, Vancouver is now back. Kesler returned and they have started winning again. I expect it to continue.

zeke
10-25-2011, 11:36 AM
Luke Schenn for Ryan Johansen.

leafman101
10-25-2011, 11:42 AM
I'd do it.

zeke
10-25-2011, 12:09 PM
We are in kind of a perfect position to peddle a bunch of borderline young-ish guys for one legitimately good guy. A lot like the Phaneuf trade, really.

Franson + Gustavsson + Bozak + Lombardi? + prospect? for one very good player would be exactly the kind of deal we should be looking at right now.

fergy57
10-25-2011, 12:17 PM
None of those names, with a slight exception to Lombardi, would I be upset with losing.

You could really say that that package has more upside than the one that landed Phaneuf.

number17
10-25-2011, 12:23 PM
You know, as dumb as Sutter was to make that Phaneuf trade, you also gotta keep in mind Phaneuf has a big contract and that's 1 reason he traded him for so little.

A youngish player like Johansen, OTOH, doesn't have that.

One player I'm very interested in is Anisimov. His icetime dropped to 11 min last game vs the Jets, and though NYR seem to be hanging in there it is primarily only because of Lundqvist. If NYR is looking for a shakeup trade and considers moving this guy for a decent price I'd be very interested.

Volcanologist
10-25-2011, 12:30 PM
Columbus needs a better GM, not to blow things up.

although I agree with Zeke that we're well positioned for a quantity-for-quality trade, I don't think it'll be for a guy like Johansen. Much more likely it'll be a vet carrying a big salary that their team wants to unload for whatever reason.

leafman101
10-25-2011, 12:35 PM
Schenn really is the perfect trade bait right now, and it has nothing to do with his quality as a player. Actually, its the fact that he is a quality player. He's the only guy on the roster who you can trade (you aren't going to move Kessel or Phaneuf) that would get you a first line forward in return. And with Phaneuf, Liles, Gunnar and Gardiner and Blacker, Percy, Aulie on the way they can afford to take the hit on the blue line.

You don't move him for anything, but if you can get a Ryan Johansen type young player, or even better a proven top line forward I think you do it. You don't have to hope someone is stupid enough to make a Phaneuf trade. You can make an Johnson/Stewart type quality hockey deal involving Schenn and trade from a position of strength to get what you need.

leafman101
10-25-2011, 12:35 PM
Columbus needs a goalie.

number17
10-25-2011, 12:36 PM
Like who though? Iggy? Lecavalier?

There aren't too many veterans who are 1. not way too old ... Burke probably wouldn't trade for anyone over 33 and I wouldn't either 2. doesn't have a killer contract and 3. is a good fit for this team

Volcanologist
10-25-2011, 12:44 PM
Like who though? Iggy? Lecavalier?

There aren't too many veterans who are 1. not way too old ... Burke probably wouldn't trade for anyone over 33 and I wouldn't either 2. doesn't have a killer contract and 3. is a good fit for this team

No, there aren't. I wouldn't be expecting a player the calibre of Iginla or Lecavalier though.

Volcanologist
10-25-2011, 12:47 PM
Schenn really is the perfect trade bait right now, and it has nothing to do with his quality as a player. Actually, its the fact that he is a quality player. He's the only guy on the roster who you can trade (you aren't going to move Kessel or Phaneuf) that would get you a first line forward in return. And with Phaneuf, Liles, Gunnar and Gardiner and Blacker, Percy, Aulie on the way they can afford to take the hit on the blue line.

You don't move him for anything, but if you can get a Ryan Johansen type young player, or even better a proven top line forward I think you do it. You don't have to hope someone is stupid enough to make a Phaneuf trade. You can make an Johnson/Stewart type quality hockey deal involving Schenn and trade from a position of strength to get what you need.

Yeah, I've always been in Schenn's corner around here but he does command good trade value. I wouldn't be averse to it provided the right player came in return.

LeafGm
10-25-2011, 12:53 PM
Luke Schenn for Ryan Johansen.
Wouldn't complain about that, Johansen's a very interesting prospect. And what would be even more interesting would be having 6'3" C Ryan Johansen and 6'5" C Joe Colborne in our prospect pipeline at the same time.

But if we do pull the trigger on dealing Schenn, I think I'd rather try and roll him up in a bigger package for something really good, rather than a prospect.

number17
10-25-2011, 02:12 PM
If we do trade Schenn, I hope we wait a few months until he plays a little better.

right now his trade value cna't be as high as, say, end of last season when he was a very good shut-down guy.

And as much as Schenn's struggled this season, we seem to forget 1. the kid's still only 21, and 2. if he can rid his slow start, this is a VERY reliable and very good shut down, and physically punishing defenseman, that will really solidify our 2nd unit for YEARS to come.

Wayward DP
10-25-2011, 03:56 PM
Schenn had a really slow start last year too. I'm not too worried. He hasn't been atrocious either in the past couple games. Playing with Pylonsarek doesn't help anyone look any better either. He'll turn it around.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 04:15 PM
with gardiner's emergence and aulie in the minors, and franson in the pressbox they really don't need schenn. whatever he gives you, you get out of some combo of those players, and in fact they might all do the things schenn is good at, individually, better than schenn (gardiner with his ability to skate the puck, franson with his ability to move the puck, aulie's defensive zone play).

schenn is a redundant piece.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 05:22 PM
Or you can look at the people not playing and think they are the redundant pieces.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 05:25 PM
of course it cuts both ways.

but you aren't going to get the same caliber player for aulie and/or franson as you would for schenn.

the whole point is they can trade schenn and he can adequately be replaced from within (and when the sum of parts is accounted for, maybe even improved upon).

MapleLeafBlueJayBoy
10-25-2011, 05:26 PM
Looking at the stats, Schenn doesn't look that bad. 3 assists in 8 games and a +1.

Now I have seen him play and I've seen the mistakes and the slowness so it just goes to show that stats aren't everything.

But he has not been that bad. He is super young and he got off to an awful start last year, which brought out the Teeder virus each game thread, But then he got going and shut Teeder up. With authority.

Heck, Teeder contradicted himself, he even said bigger guys get off to slower starts. heh

I am willing to give Schenn some leeway on the bottom pairing.

Komi no, he has had his chance and is no better.

Mega
10-25-2011, 05:27 PM
Or you can look at the people not playing and think they are the redundant pieces.

I was thinking the same thing.



It's gotta be tough getting in a rhythm only playing 12 minutes a game. His best game so far was when Wilson had him out there 18+ minutes.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 05:29 PM
I'd rather not give up on Schenn when he has proven to be a quality NHL defenseman. I'm fine with letting him get out of this 'funk'. The team is super young and I have no problem letting this group grow together without tearing shit up because of a 10 game stretch. If we get last years Schenn back it will only help us this year and in the playoffs if we make it.

WellPlayed
10-25-2011, 05:30 PM
Gotta agree. I like Schenn, but I think Aulie has made him expendable. Plus I think guys like him tend to be overvalued. If we could use him to land a young, top-line power forward, or someone with 1st line center potential (i.e. 70+ points) we should do it.

I have a feeling Burke may be thinking the same.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 05:31 PM
of course franson is redundant on this team.

but the same sort of things that make him redundant (they don't really need a big defenseman, or a puck moving defenseman), make schenn redundant (they just don't NEED what he brings to the table).

it's just looking at the bigger picture. i'm not saying they should consider moving schenn because he isn't a good player. the complete opposite. they should explore possibilities because he IS a good player and can get a good player in return.

the leafs are better off with a young first line forward and aulie in the lineup, than having to settle on tim connollys, or the second rate return aulie and franson would net you, and keeping schenn.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 05:34 PM
okay then, give me some examples of top line forwards Schenn could be traded for right now

MapleLeafBlueJayBoy
10-25-2011, 05:34 PM
Burke kind of f'ed up that Nashville trade we all loved back in the day.

Mega
10-25-2011, 05:36 PM
Agreed, so long as the return is substantial. Johansen is unproven, I dunno if I'd risk trading Schenn for him.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 05:39 PM
okay then, give me some examples of top line forwards Schenn could be traded for right now

I don't want to trade Schenn, but if we could get Giroux for him, I'd drive him to the airport myself. I just don't see how we could possibly get a young first line player (mostly C as it is our greatest need) for Schenn.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:04 PM
how am i supposed to know who is available?

the day before dion phaneuf became a maple leaf do you think anybody knew he was available?

maybe they can't because nobody is willing to trade a front line forward. i don't know. that doesnt' really challenge my point, though.

but then just as i don't know who is available you don't know that nobody is available. so this is a pretty silly line of argument.

the question is what gives the leafs the best shot at acquiring a front end talent, though, without blowing a hole in the team. obviously if kessel or phaneuf is on the table then teams might be willing to trade a goo dyoung first line (or potential first line) forward. but that creates a hole for the maple leafs.

schenn would almost certainly be of interest, though, and given the leafs glut of blueline talent he is expendable.

Wayward DP
10-25-2011, 06:15 PM
Of the Leafs blueliners, aside from Dion and Gardiner, who I think everyone can agree won't be traded, Schenn likely has the most trade value.

And, as mbow has pointed out, his skill set isn't unique or needed on our d-corps with our recent additions.

So for me, even though I may like him better than someone like a Franson, it probably makes more sense to trade Schenn simply because both a) he will get the most in return, especially in light of b) what he brings to our D can likely be pretty easily replaced from within.

However, with that said, once Schenn gets going again I still really like what he brings to the table. BUT, if he can be parlayed into some front-end talent, the roster probably looks better top-to-bottom at the end of that day then with our defensive logjam as it is.

Metalleaf
10-25-2011, 06:18 PM
Burke kind of f'ed up that Nashville trade we all loved back in the day.

So, you want Brett Lebda back do you?

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:18 PM
sometimes you have to trade from strength to address weaknesses.

it sure would be nice to swing another phaneuf trade. but those only come along so often.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 06:21 PM
how am i supposed to know who is available?



You suggested we trade Schenn for a top line forward. I doubt that Schenn would command a top line forward. I'm interested in knowing the type of player you are thinking. IMO this is not a real possibility.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:23 PM
You suggested we trade Schenn for a top line forward. I doubt that Schenn would command a top line forward. I'm interested in knowing the type of player you are thinking. IMO this is not a real possibility.

i'm not going to argue about arbitrary trade value.

bottom line is short of kessel or phaneuf he is the most likely player to be of interest to teams that are looking to shake things up and deal a front (or potential front) line player.

he is a recent top 5 pick who is held in very high regard. that is the sort fo player who can anchor a trade for a good player.

i'm not going to speculate about who might or might not be available, though. that's a stupid, pointless exercise.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:25 PM
in any event, you're arguing like a tsn reporter talking about the leafs -- the standards you go on seem to be moving targets.

i don't know exaclty what schenn would fetch in a trade.

i do know, however, that he is replaceable from within, that the leafs need a front line forward, and that he's the one asset that they have that seems to stand a good chance of landing that type of player without creating a big hole in the leafs' lineup.

leafman101
10-25-2011, 06:28 PM
If you can't get what you are looking for in return for Schenn keep him. But there is no one else on the team who is tradable and has potentially as much value as Schenn which is the point.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:30 PM
yeah, i mean, offering him in a trade doesn't bind you to trading him.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 06:35 PM
If you can't get what you are looking for in return for Schenn keep him. But there is no one else on the team who is tradable and has potentially as much value as Schenn which is the point.

So quick to write off Schenn. I'm happy you are not the GM.

Besides, Schenn would not provide a return for an upgrade on our top line. This was made up in MSUN's dream world.

leafman101
10-25-2011, 06:37 PM
I'm not writing off Schenn. Like I said in my initial post. I'm not suggesting trading him because he stinks. I'm suggesting trading him because he is good. And you could get something good for him.

I like Schenn, but the Leafs are deep on D, and if they could get an equivalent player/prospect up front IMO that is good for the team.

IMO he is easily their most valuable asset behind Kessel and Phaneuf (and maybe Reimer, but goalie values are weird), but unlike those other guys, he is expendable.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 06:38 PM
like?

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:40 PM
what a stupid post.

on the one hand leafman is too quick to write off schenn. when really, all leafman has said is they should trade him if they can get a first line forward for him. above and beyond that, it isn't a worhtwhile idea to trade him for a first line forward, if they can get one for him, because we'd be 'writing him off too quickly'.

but then, on the other hand, trading him for a good return would not net the team a first line upgrade.

so basically you're just arguing for hte sake of arguing, with absolutely no congruity in your own argument.

so what is it? is schenn too good to trade for a first liner? or not good enough to net a first liner in return?

LeafGm
10-25-2011, 06:42 PM
like?
Not really sure why you're so insistent on the pointless exercise of coming up with a list of specific players. Like msun mentioned, we don't know who's available. It's just a couple of general points being made:

1) Out of the defensemen that we could afford to trade, Schenn likely has the most trade value.
2) IF Burke can land a good forward for Schenn, or a package including Schenn, he should seriously consider it.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 06:43 PM
what a stupid post.

Schenn has more value to the Leafs than what he would bring back in a trade. He would NOT net a first line improvement on our team.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:43 PM
like?

it's funny that you think this line of arguing gives you an upper hand in the discussion.

what you're in effect doing is asking leafman to either speculate, or just throw out names of players he'd trade schenn for.

what purpose does that serve?

he isn't saying trade schenn at all costs (neither am i). we're just saying that they have a glut of d-men, a need for a first line forward, and a d-man who was a recent top five pick, who is highly regarded around the league, and stands a pretty good chance of netting the sort of player the leafs need should his name be floated in trade negotiations.

i don't know who is available. i can tell you, though, that if a first line forward is available and the leafs float schenn's name in discussions then the other team will be listening.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:44 PM
what a stupid post.

Schenn has more value to the Leafs than what he would bring back in a trade. He would NOT net a first line improvement on our team.

how do you know this?

if you value schenn so highly then how do you know other gm's don't as well?

Blueman
10-25-2011, 06:44 PM
Not really sure why you're so insistent on the pointless exercise of coming up with a list of specific players. Like msun mentioned, we don't know who's available. It's just a couple of general points being made:

1) Out of the defensemen that we could afford to trade, Schenn likely has the most trade value.
2) IF Burke can land a good forward for Schenn, or a package including Schenn, he should seriously consider it.

I'm just sick of people saying we should trade Schenn for a top line forward, or something 'good' when looking at the REALITY of the league, this just isn't going to happen. Now maybe Leafman's something 'good' is different than what I call good, so I asked.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:45 PM
hell, phaneuf didn't cost the leafs a single player at all comparable in any way to schenn (in age, reputation, or potential). you're just arguing in circles for the sake of arguing, and making bad arguments at that.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 06:46 PM
how do you know this?

if you value schenn so highly then how do you know other gm's don't as well?

what a stupid post.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 06:46 PM
hell, phaneuf didn't cost the leafs a single player at all comparable in any way to schenn (in age, reputation, or potential). you're just arguing in circles for the sake of arguing, and making bad arguments at that.

So we had one steal of a trade and you are expecting it to happen every year?

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:46 PM
I'm just sick of people saying we should trade Schenn for a top line forward, or something 'good' when looking at the REALITY of the league, this just isn't going to happen. Now maybe Leafman's something 'good' is different than what I call good, so I asked.

such clairvoyance. yes, you are the only one with a firm grasp on reality here.

you're just talking out of your ass. your'e doing exactly what you're trying to argue against.

nobody has said definitively that schenn could get the leafs a first line forward. just that he might.

inobody is saying 'they should trade aulie for a first line forward!' then you'd have a point.

leafman101
10-25-2011, 06:46 PM
IMO saying trade a package of guys like Lombardi, Gunnar and Bozak for a first liner isn't realistic. But to offer up one of your best young players, and flat out one of the best shut down defensive prospects in the league for a good player...well I'd call that realistic looking at the reality of the league.

Teams love guys like Schenn. You are talking about a 21 year old top 5 pick, who has already played 3 years in the league and is coming off a year where he was the most physical defenseman in the NHL.

Maybe I like Schenn more than you do, but to me that guy has value.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 06:47 PM
Your points are dumb and I'm pointing out how they are dumb. You then don't like it and I don't really care.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:47 PM
So we had one steal of a trade and you are expecting it to happen every year?

what? and i'm the one without a grasp on reality?

i'm saying the complete opposite. the leafs can't rely on a trade like that, so they should consider trading schenn.

but the point is that if ian white and matt stajan can land you phaneuf then imo luke schenn stands a pretty good shot at landing you something pretty good.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 06:48 PM
IMO saying trade a package of guys like Lombardi, Gunnar and Bozak for a first liner isn't realistic. But to offer up one of your best young players, and flat out one of the best shut down defensive prospects in the league for a good player...well I'd call that realistic looking at the reality of the league.

Teams love guys like Schenn. You are talking about a 21 year old top 5 pick, who has already played 3 years in the league and is coming off a year where he was the most physical defenseman in the NHL.

Maybe I like Schenn more than you do, but to me that guy has value.

I can see making a package with Schenn in it for a top line forward, but the team does not need to shake things up when they have a decent enough record right now.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 06:48 PM
Okay, I've stirred the pot up enough for one night.

Preston_Mizzi
10-25-2011, 06:49 PM
I'd be surprised if a team traded a legit top line forward for Schenn. Teams aren't stupid and know Schenn is kind of limited. First line forwards have always been more valuable than stay at home d with no offensive upside.

But at the same time, if a good deal is available Burke should be all over that.

leafman101
10-25-2011, 06:50 PM
They don't need to shake things up, but IMO to get to that next level and become contenders they still need at least one more top line forward. And thats the goal isn't it. To win the cup. I know we've been focused on just making the playoffs for so long, but at the end of the day thats not really what the Leafs are trying to build towards.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 06:50 PM
I'd be surprised if a team traded a legit top line forward for Schenn. Teams aren't stupid and know Schenn is kind of limited. First line forwards have always been more valuable than stay at home d with no offensive upside.

But at the same time, if a good deal is available Burke should be all over that.

^^ This

LeafGm
10-25-2011, 06:50 PM
I'm just sick of people saying we should trade for a top line forward, or something 'good' when looking at the REALITY of the league, this just isn't going to happen. Now maybe Leafman's something 'good' is different than what I call good, so I asked.
Look, you don't actually know shit about the "REALITY" of the league. And before you get upset, neither do I, neither does mbow or really anyone else on here.

We can discuss the team, make insightful observations, offer opinions etc., but none of us truly knows what goes on behind the scenes. Every single time Burke has made a trade, with the exception of the Kessel trade, which unfolded very publicly for a few unique reasons, nobody on here has known a thing about it ahead of time and nobody in the hockey media has either. So that's why my eyes kind of glaze over whenever anybody emphatically states that we will not make a move, or engages in a hfboards type discussion where a bunch of posters pointlessly play GM and start throwing out names of players on other teams and coming up with hypothetical packages.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:51 PM
Your points are dumb and I'm pointing out how they are dumb. You then don't like it and I don't really care.

yep. blueman is smarter than everybody else here, clearly.

every single argument you have put forth is contradictory and self defeating.

'schenn is good enough that he shouldn't be dealt for a first liner but not good enough to land a first liner.'

'your argument is invalid because you don't know what players are available or what schenn would land in a trade; but i know for a fact that schenn wouldn't be abel to land a first line player in a trade'.

anyways it looks like more people are on side with what leafman and i are saying rather than you.

so you can think your smarter than everybdoy else but really you should just stop arguing in circles, for the sake of arguing.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:52 PM
Look, you don't actually know shit about the "REALITY" of the league. And before you get upset, neither do I, neither does mbow or really anyone else on here.

We can discuss the team, make insightful observations, offer opinions etc., but none of us truly knows what goes on behind the scenes. Every single time Burke has made a trade, with the exception of the Kessel trade, which unfolded very publicly for a few unique reasons, nobody on here has known a thing about it ahead of time and nobody in the hockey media has either. So that's why my eyes kind of glaze over whenever anybody emphatically states that we will not make a move, or engages in a hfboards type discussion where a bunch of posters pointlessly play GM and start throwing out names of players on other teams and coming up with hypothetical packages.

i'm yet to say anybody say definitively that luke schenn WOULD land a first line player.

just that he might.

i guess it makes more sense for hte leafs to rest on their laurels, though, and not try and improve the team because -- hey -- they got off to a 5-2-1 start.

mbow30
10-25-2011, 06:55 PM
I'd be surprised if a team traded a legit top line forward for Schenn. Teams aren't stupid and know Schenn is kind of limited. First line forwards have always been more valuable than stay at home d with no offensive upside.

But at the same time, if a good deal is available Burke should be all over that.

could be the case but, again, it's just speculation.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 06:57 PM
'schenn is good enough that he shouldn't be dealt for a first liner but not good enough to land a first liner.'

i'm saying Schenn is good enough to stay, but would NOT command a first liner in return. If you can get a first line player (an upgrade to what we have now) I'm all for it. I just do not think it likely. I even posted if we could get Schenn for Giroux, I'd drive him to the airport myself.

LeafGm
10-25-2011, 06:57 PM
i'm yet to say anybody say definitively that luke schenn WOULD land a first line player.

just that he might.

i guess it makes more sense for hte leafs to rest on their laurels, though, and not try and improve the team because -- hey -- they got off to a 5-2-1 start.
Yep, I think the overriding commentary so far can probably be summed up as:

Schenn likely has the most trade value of any of our expendable defenseman, so Burke should look into trading/packaging him up if the right deal's available.

Unless someone is an aboslutely massive Schenn fan and doesn't want to see him traded for any reason, I don't really see the contraversy.

Blueman
10-25-2011, 06:58 PM
i'm yet to say anybody say definitively that luke schenn WOULD land a first line player.



Ah, it came across to me as.. trade him for a first line player now Burke! I think we are on the same page now.

LeafGm
10-25-2011, 06:59 PM
We all agree? Sweet. Ice cream and hookers for everybody!

Blueman
10-25-2011, 07:01 PM
Damn, I hate agreeing with Msun and Leafman.. dammit dammit dammit! :sarcasm

Preston_Mizzi
10-25-2011, 08:34 PM
Circle jerk time

zeke
10-25-2011, 08:55 PM
'schenn is good enough that he shouldn't be dealt for a first liner but not good enough to land a first liner.'

i'm saying Schenn is good enough to stay, but would NOT command a first liner in return. If you can get a first line player (an upgrade to what we have now) I'm all for it. I just do not think it likely. I even posted if we could get Schenn for Giroux, I'd drive him to the airport myself.

honestly, I think the exact opposite.

I think his trade value is higher than his actual value.

He's probably the only Leaf that this is true about.

zeke
10-25-2011, 08:58 PM
I'd be surprised if a team traded a legit top line forward for Schenn. Teams aren't stupid and know Schenn is kind of limited. First line forwards have always been more valuable than stay at home d with no offensive upside.

But at the same time, if a good deal is available Burke should be all over that.

Never underestimate NHL GMs' obsession with physically dominant defensemen. Teams always have, and always will, overpay for this type. Hell, we did it by trading up and using a 5th overall pick on this kind of defenseman, AND by speding millions on Komisarek.

I'd bet there are many GMs (and lets be honest, many leaf fans) who see nothing but a future cornerstone defensive defenseman when they look at Schenn, a la Scott Stevens.

Montana
10-25-2011, 09:15 PM
Case in point....Lou spent $25.5 million on Anton Volchenkov.

zeke
10-25-2011, 11:04 PM
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/gms-call-for-mandatory-visors/article2213719/?utm_medium=Feeds:%20RSS/Atom&utm_source=Hockey&utm_content=2213719&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter



“When Chris comes back, he’ll be wearing a visor,” Flyers GM Paul Holmgren said. “We made it mandatory in the American Hockey League. To me, it’s not an issue: Players should wear them.”

Toronto Maple Leafs GM Brian Burke, who was in attendance at the game Monday and had Pronger on his team when the Anaheim Ducks won the Stanley Cup four years ago, agrees.

“Visors should be mandatory for all defencemen, at the least,” Burke said, adding that blueliners are at “a far greater risk” of being hit in the face by a puck because of all the deflections in front of the net.

“I’d want to hear the GMs out on the larger topic [of everyone having to wear them], but I think I would support Homer.”

teeds
10-25-2011, 11:27 PM
Its hilarious to read the last two pages. Seriously, everyone is NOW on the same page, Schenn is possibly worth trading.

Meaning, golden boy has suddenly lost his lustre. Seeing a great talent like Phaneuf, and even more so, the very young Gardiner may have "enabled" this sudden mass consciousness.

But if you guys have suddenly realized young Schenn is not all that. What do you think opposing GM's have figured out?

The time to get a first line player was LAST YEAR, while the NHL was still universally fellating the image of Schenn. Not now, he is flawed, and getting regularly benched. And he is grossly overpaid.

He is Komisarek 3.5. Unfortunately.

Schenn is a blue chip stock like Ballard Power which was once trading at 188 dollars, which is now a much maligned penny stock.

Burke has made some great moves and some bad ones. Signing Schenn to his contract, so far, has been Komisarek ALL OVER AGAIN. Hopefully he comes back somewhat, but getting a first liner for him? Wow, this kid had better pick up his game 500%.

leafman101
10-25-2011, 11:35 PM
Visors should be mandatory. And those foot protector things. They really aren't big adjustments to make and so much is invested in these guys, those investments need to be protected.

worm
10-26-2011, 10:57 AM
Ya. Most of the star players have visors so it cant impact vision that much. Just grandfather it in.

fergy57
10-26-2011, 11:43 AM
Can we think up a term for the last player to not wear a visor that would be as epic as the 'Craig Mactavish?'

leafman101
10-26-2011, 01:52 PM
Jonas Hiller's sweet Movember mask:

18931894

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/Instant-classic-Ducks-goalie-Jonas-Hiller-8217;_ylt=AoRqxOKm7Q43P4OxOAbCIIA5nYcB?urn=nhl-wp15806

LeafOfFaith
10-26-2011, 01:58 PM
honestly, I think the exact opposite.

I think his trade value is higher than his actual value.

He's probably the only Leaf that this is true about.

I agree with this.

But I disagree with the idea of trading him unless it really is for a true first line center.

I still believe that Schenn could be the next Pronger. I don't believe they're giving him the full opportunity to play like he did in his first year; they seem to have pulled him in and made him less aggressive somehow. But the same way that Phaneuf let loose near the end of last year and is still riding the wave of awesomeness, I think Schenn will eventually break free of whatever they're saddling him with and blast through the next level.

JaysCyYoung
10-26-2011, 02:05 PM
Schenn is Adam Foote, not Pronger.

Chris Pronger remains an elite offensive defenceman and is one of the most skilled PP catalysts in the league. Luke doesn't have that sort of upside due to his lack of a point shot and limited abilities with the puck. He'll be a good one but Pronger is a top twenty defender of all-time.

LeafGm
10-26-2011, 02:42 PM
Schenn and Pronger is an absolutely horrible comparison, unless we're talking about Sean Pronger. Schenn is four inches short of Pronger's intimidating size and is also missing Pronger's trademarked total disregard for human life. He's also missing Pronger's cannon of a shot and offensive ability that puts him among the top defensive scorers every year.

zeke
10-26-2011, 03:33 PM
Foote was a much better skater than Schenn.

When Schenn is on he's very good and a legit presence out there, but even when he's good he's still prone to getting caught out pretty badly due to a lack of footspeed. I could be wrong, and he has plenty of years left to improve and prove me wrong, but I have my doubts he can ever be that elite defensive presence we hope he can be.

Hoss
10-26-2011, 03:37 PM
I mentioned this inthe other thread... would you do Kadri and say Schenn for Spezza

Spezz may have had some down years, but he is showing so far this year his production. I guess it depends on if you feel Spezz is a true number one centre.

Spezz and Kessel could be like a scary return of the Spezz Heatley combo.

BG
10-26-2011, 03:54 PM
Schenn will be fine. He was selected #5 overall because he was a "sure-thing", and looking at the draft there aren't many that are better than him right now.

The kid's a horse, just signed a great contract and is struggling with a couple of new defence partners. He'll round into form over the next dozen games, right now he's trying to find his game - once he comes around he'll start punishing opposing forwards again.

leafman101
10-26-2011, 03:56 PM
I don't think Schenn is the next Pronger by any means, but at 21-22 Pronger wasn't Pronger yet either. Same goes for guys like Foote and Regehr. The guy is still really, really young and inexperienced.

mbow30
10-26-2011, 04:00 PM
i think schenn is going to be a very effective defensive and physical defenseman. his skating is better than zeke credits him for, and he gets burned less often than zeke argues.

what has me losing hope, though, is his shot.

he still can't shoot the puck, and that will forever limit him offensively. i still have a glimmer of hope that he can develop one but it's looking increasingly unlikely.

he has, quite possibly, the worst point shot in the league. if you have a bad point shot you cannot play on the pp. if you cannot play on the pp then your production will be limited.

and unless he can be a 35-40 point d-man then he falls into a group with guys like regehr and orpik. good players, but generally overrated and overpaid.

i should add, though, that i think schenn IS better with the puck than those two. still, unless he can develop a shot it won't really matter too much.

Volcanologist
10-26-2011, 04:48 PM
schenn will be fine IMO. it's normal for 21 year old kids to struggle sometimes.

certain people have agendas regarding this player and now see an opportunity, here in the early going, to start harping on those agendas once again. An opportunity that was buried for quite a while while Schenn excelled.

I have the same criteria for Schenn as I always have...if he develops into that top-notch shutdown presence, then it was worth drafting him at 5. If not, then it wasn't. Pretty simple. I don't think we've ascertained that at age 21-22, although some may disagree.

I suppose looking at it now if I could go back in time we could have not traded up and taken Myers over Schenn in that draft, but that's only with the benefit of hindsight. It's not like Myers went in the top 10 anyway.

zeke
10-26-2011, 04:52 PM
I know it's hard for you to believe, but it's pretty easy to critique schenn's play without having an agenda.

teeds
10-26-2011, 05:00 PM
I could drink three or four doubles and skate rings around Schenn as long as he agreed not to swing his stick at me. Or hit me. I think he is by far and away, the worst skater I have seen in the modern era, on any team. That is why it is soooooo hard for me to get excited about him.

Only when he is on all five cylinders and nailing people to the wall and carrying the puck a bit, to keep forwards off of him, can I get on the Schenn train. And I haven't seen ANY of that this season.

Giving a guy who plays well for one quarter of the season, and plays like a clumsy oaf, the other 3/4's is a recipe for cap disaster.

It was homers like most of you guys that pressured Burke into giving him that contract.

Blueman
10-26-2011, 05:06 PM
It was homers like most of you guys that pressured Burke into giving him that contract.

It's homers like you who think Burke would be swayed into giving out a contract based upon Leaf fans opinions.

JackBurton
10-26-2011, 07:56 PM
I was worried when I saw how long that contract situation was lingering on with Schenn.

LeafOfFaith
10-26-2011, 10:41 PM
I don't think Schenn is the next Pronger by any means, but at 21-22 Pronger wasn't Pronger yet either. Same goes for guys like Foote and Regehr. The guy is still really, really young and inexperienced.

Bingo.

LeafOfFaith
10-26-2011, 10:43 PM
i think schenn is going to be a very effective defensive and physical defenseman. his skating is better than zeke credits him for, and he gets burned less often than zeke argues.

what has me losing hope, though, is his shot.

he still can't shoot the puck, and that will forever limit him offensively. i still have a glimmer of hope that he can develop one but it's looking increasingly unlikely.

he has, quite possibly, the worst point shot in the league. if you have a bad point shot you cannot play on the pp. if you cannot play on the pp then your production will be limited.

and unless he can be a 35-40 point d-man then he falls into a group with guys like regehr and orpik. good players, but generally overrated and overpaid.

i should add, though, that i think schenn IS better with the puck than those two. still, unless he can develop a shot it won't really matter too much.

This just isn't true.

There were a few times last year, and at least a couple of goals, that were nice blasts from the point.

He's not anywhere near as bad as everyone is painting him.

LeafGm
10-26-2011, 11:22 PM
I don't think Schenn is the next Pronger by any means, but at 21-22 Pronger wasn't Pronger yet either. Same goes for guys like Foote and Regehr. The guy is still really, really young and inexperienced.
It's still an absolutely ridiculous comparison that can't be defended. Partly because of the size difference, but mainly because the tremendous gulf between their offensive potential. Just compare their draft years in the CHL:

Pronger: GP 61, G 15, A 62, Pts 77
Schenn: GP 57, G 7, A 21, Pts 28

I've actually come to like Luke Schenn a lot, even though I was dead set against the decision to trade up to draft him at #5. But for all his strengths, in no universe does Luke Schenn have the potential to become the "next Pronger", or even comparable to Chris Pronger.

leafman101
10-26-2011, 11:26 PM
I'm not saying he's the next Pronger. I said I don't think he is. I'm just using Pronger's career path to illustrate the stage of development Like Schenn is at. He's going to get a lot better.

LeafGm
10-26-2011, 11:30 PM
I'm not saying he's the next Pronger. I said I don't think he is. I'm just using Pronger's career path to illustrate the stage of development Like Schenn is at. He's going to get a lot better.
He could get a lot better. Don't fall into the Sensfan trap of guaranteeing that a player is going to improve simply because he's young.

And there's no real evidence that the offensive component of his game will ever get any better.

leafman101
10-26-2011, 11:40 PM
All players get better. How much better they get varies, but with experience, players improve. Especially the defensive side of the game for defensemen. And that is really what Schenn's game and skill set is based around. There is a reason why scouts thought he was one of the best defensive dman prospects to come around in a long time when he was drafted. He'll never be an offensive stud, but he doesn't have to be. Thats not his game.

There seems to be this feeling around here that defensive defensmen aren't useful for some reason. The problem is when teams overpay for big physical guys who really aren't that good, and have absolutely no puck skills and are pylons like Komi and Volchenkov. But elite shut down defensemen are pretty damn valuable if you can find one.

zeke
10-27-2011, 12:14 AM
the question is whether you can be a genuine shutdown guy when you lack footspeed.

I like my shutdown guys to be in the Lidstrom Niedermayer mold, myself.

CRL
10-27-2011, 08:53 AM
“@PKessel81: "@prizzo38: @43_Kadri @pkessel81 @bozie42 who eats the most when you boys go out for dinner? #HungryMan". Schenn by far. #elephant”

leafman101
10-27-2011, 12:25 PM
Yahoo! Sports has hired an anonymous player to write a column for them. Whoever it is just wrote a pretty interesting article about the new head shot rules. Its pretty cool to get a players perspective on this, and definitely worth the read and you should check it out:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/The-Player-Can-we-trust-NHL-Shanahan-8217-s-j?urn=nhl-wp15888#remaining-content

However, the important part is while talking about players putting themselves in dangerous positions, he throws out this gem which just confirms the impact dion Phaneuf has on the game:


It's unreasonable for me to expect that I can cut across the Toronto Maple Leafs blueline with my head down and not have Dion Phaneuf(notes) try to blast me. In that case, I'm not "defenseless;" I'm just asking for it.

Mega
10-27-2011, 12:27 PM
Turris' agent confirms the trade request.

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/7155852/kyle-turris-asks-phoenix-coyotes-trade

mbow30
10-27-2011, 12:40 PM
calls phaneuf a clean checker in the next paragraph, too.

[quote]What I can expect — what I think is reasonable — is that those guys don't lead with their elbows and aim for my chin. (Which they don't.) Play me as hard as you want but show me some respect and I'll do the same for you. I think that's all that the majority of the players in league ask from each other.[.quote]

LeafOfFaith
10-27-2011, 02:15 PM
It's still an absolutely ridiculous comparison that can't be defended. Partly because of the size difference, but mainly because the tremendous gulf between their offensive potential. Just compare their draft years in the CHL:

Pronger: GP 61, G 15, A 62, Pts 77
Schenn: GP 57, G 7, A 21, Pts 28

I've actually come to like Luke Schenn a lot, even though I was dead set against the decision to trade up to draft him at #5. But for all his strengths, in no universe does Luke Schenn have the potential to become the "next Pronger", or even comparable to Chris Pronger.

When I compare Schenn to Pronger, I'm really not even thinking about the offensive side to his game. For me, Pronger was never a particularly impressive offensive player, even though he put up some nice stats for a stretch a few years back. And if you look at his first five years in the league, he was a 30-35 point player at his best. Schenn had 22 last year and had improved in each of his three full years, and now has 3 points in 8 games.

So, in terms of offense, I really don't think Schenn is that far off from him - potentially - but when I compare him to Pronger, it's as a potential shut down guy. I think Schenn could definitely be that mutilator on the blueline that he's projected to be. And that's critical to have back there. The offense, if it comes like Pronger's did later in his career, even if not as a 50 point guy, but rather as a 40 point guy, is a pretty amazing all around player back there.

fergy57
10-27-2011, 02:22 PM
LoF, comparing Schenn to Pronger is almost as off base as me comparing Grabo's start to his career as similar to St. Louis' earlier this offseason.

:drink

Volcanologist
10-27-2011, 02:44 PM
If we're going to talk style comparison to all-timers, a better one for Schenn would be Rod Langway.

JaysCyYoung
10-27-2011, 03:04 PM
Langway's probably the best purely defensive defenceman of all-time or at least in the discussion for it (along with Tim Horton, who had underrated offensive abilities), so that's high praise as well. And it's a more apt comparison than the offensively gifted, 6'6 beast that is Chris Pronger.

LeafGm
10-27-2011, 03:05 PM
When I compare Schenn to Pronger, I'm really not even thinking about the offensive side to his game. For me, Pronger was never a particularly impressive offensive player, even though he put up some nice stats for a stretch a few years back. And if you look at his first five years in the league, he was a 30-35 point player at his best. Schenn had 22 last year and had improved in each of his three full years, and now has 3 points in 8 games.

So, in terms of offense, I really don't think Schenn is that far off from him - potentially - but when I compare him to Pronger, it's as a potential shut down guy. I think Schenn could definitely be that mutilator on the blueline that he's projected to be. And that's critical to have back there. The offense, if it comes like Pronger's did later in his career, even if not as a 50 point guy, but rather as a 40 point guy, is a pretty amazing all around player back there.
Pronger was never a particularly impressive offensive player, and he put up some nice stats for "a stretch a few years back". Is that supposed to be a joke?

Pronger's offensive ranking among defensemen since his first break-out season with St-Louis:

98/99: 12th
99/00: 2nd
00/01: 16th (had 47 points in only 51 games)
01/02: 9th
02/03: N/A (only played 5 games)
03/04: 3rd
05/06: 9th
06/07: 7th
07/08: 15th
08/09: 14th
09/10: 5th
10/11: N/A (only played 50 games)

So, this is a guy who for over the past decade, except for a couple of years cut drastically short by injury, and his last two years in Anaheim (in which he still scored 12 goals/43 points and 11 goals/48 points) has been a guy who has pretty consistently finished as a top-10 defender in terms of offensive production, with 3 top-5 finishes, a Norris trophy and a Hart trophy in his repetoire as well. He's also been a clutch scorer, since in that time he's also carried three teams on runs to the Stanley Cup finals, and in those three runs he's put up a combined 12 goals and 54 points in 66 games.

So no, if you think that Schenn is "not that far off from (Pronger)" offensively, even potentially...you're wrong. In terms of being a "shut down" guy, it's still a silly comparison because there are a lot of other good "shut down defensemen" with Schenn's limited offensive upside that would be a much more appropriate comparison. You're also severely underestimating how hard it is to score 40 points in the NHL as a defenseman---especially when you have a lousy shot, and no history of being an offensive producer at any level of hockey.

JaysCyYoung
10-27-2011, 03:08 PM
Now if one wants to look around the league at current young rearguard prospects/youngsters, then Alex Pietrangelo is a potential Chris Pronger, not Luke Schenn.

LeafOfFaith
10-27-2011, 03:17 PM
Pronger was never a particularly impressive offensive player, and he put up some nice stats for "a stretch a few years back". Is that supposed to be a joke?

Pronger's offensive ranking among defensemen since his first break-out season with St-Louis:

98/99: 12th
99/00: 2nd
00/01: 16th (had 47 points in only 51 games)
01/02: 9th
02/03: N/A (only played 5 games)
03/04: 3rd
05/06: 9th
06/07: 7th
07/08: 15th
08/09: 14th
09/10: 5th
10/11: N/A (only played 50 games)

So, this is a guy who for over the past decade, except for a couple of years cut drastically short by injury, and his last two years in Anaheim (in which he still scored 12 goals/43 points and 11 goals/48 points) has been a guy who has pretty consistently finished as a top-10 defender in terms of offensive production, with 3 top-5 finishes, a Norris trophy and a Hart trophy in his repetoire as well. He's also been a clutch scorer, since in that time he's also carried three teams on runs to the Stanley Cup finals, and in those three runs he's put up a combined 12 goals and 54 points in 66 games.

So no, if you think that Schenn is "not that far off from (Pronger)" offensively, even potentially...you're wrong. In terms of being a "shut down" guy, it's still a silly comparison because there are a lot of other good "shut down defensemen" with Schenn's limited offensive upside that would be a much more appropriate comparison. You're also severely underestimating how hard it is to score 40 points in the NHL as a defenseman---especially when you have a lousy shot, and no history of being an offensive producer at any level of hockey.

Nope, not a joke. He's played for some good teams and is a good player obviously, but I've never watched Chris Pronger play and thought he's very dangerous offensively.

Schenn may never get to be as good as Pronger is, but I don't think they're in different leagues entirely. Schenn gets next to no time on the PP and is basically used as a defensive player only, and still had 22 points last year. Pronger had 25 points in his third season in the NHL.

I don't think it's so obvious that Schenn can't grow into a Pronger-type in his prime. Especially since his prime is several years away.

JaysCyYoung
10-27-2011, 03:21 PM
Chris Pronger's been one of the most dominant offensive blueliners in the NHL for years. He's one of the best PP quarterbacks in the league. If you don't think that he's dangerous offensively you don't know much about hockey. It's literally that black and white.

LeafOfFaith
10-27-2011, 03:27 PM
He's a very complete player back there, but I'm just not blown away by his offensive skills (note that I'm not saying his stats aren't good).

And given where he was at in his third season in the NHL, it's way too early to say Schenn can't be similar one day.

LeafGm
10-27-2011, 03:28 PM
Nope, not a joke. He's played for some good teams and is a good player obviously, but I've never watched Chris Pronger play and thought he's very dangerous offensively.
Then your ability to evaluate hockey through observation is severely flawed. Also, stats over a 12 year period > your observations.


Schenn may never get to be as good as Pronger is, but I don't think they're in different leagues entirely. Schenn gets next to no time on the PP and is basically used as a defensive player only, and still had 22 points last year. Pronger had 25 points in his third season in the NHL.

I don't think it's so obvious that Schenn can't grow into a Pronger-type in his prime. Especially since his prime is several years away.
If you play close to 82 games, while getting top-4 minutes pretty much the entire time, almost any NHL defenseman can score 14-22 points in their sleep, as Schenn has over his first three seasons.

And the reason why a 21 year-old Chris Pronger still had offensive potential after scoring 25 points in his third season, is because he demonstrated his massive offensive potential by scoring 62 points in 63 games as a 17 year-old in the OHL, and 77 points in 61 games as an 18 year old. Schenn on the other hand, is rightly not thought of as somebody who has the potential to become one of the best offensive defensemen in the league over the next decade, because besides his lack of production in the NHL, he scored 29 points in 72 games as a 17 year old in the WHL, and 28 points in 57 games as an 18 year-old.

zeke
10-27-2011, 03:33 PM
Pronger's one of the elite offensive defensemen of his generation.

mbow30
10-27-2011, 03:37 PM
to draw back on a previous argument, you say schenn has scored goals by 'blasting them from the point' -- well i have found 7 of his 12 career goals on youtube. none of them were blasts from the point.

his first career goal was a wrist shot from the half boards (vs montreal).

he has scored two on wrist shots from the blueline vs. pittsburgh.

one was scored with a wrist shot on a 3-on-2 on a drop by stajan (vs philadelphia).

one was that end to end rush against boston.

two were scored in the same game against ottawa (the only two slapper goals i can find) -- both were with a full head of steam on odd man rushes, shot from the faceoff dot.

zeke
10-27-2011, 03:39 PM
those were two prettty sweet shots, though.

UWHabs
10-27-2011, 03:40 PM
The reason you don't think of Pronger as an offensive defenseman is that he's a beast physically. It's because he's a 2-way guy, he's not an "offensive defenseman". He doesn't control the game offensively like a Leetch or Lidstrom or Green does. But that's what makes him even better overall - he doesn't need to control the game, but he still puts up the numbers that the top defensemen do.

JaysCyYoung
10-27-2011, 03:41 PM
He's a very complete player back there, but I'm just not blown away by his offensive skills (note that I'm not saying his stats aren't good).

And given where he was at in his third season in the NHL, it's way too early to say Schenn can't be similar one day.

Chris Pronger played a large portion (the majority to date) of his career in the Dead Puck Era, whereas Luke Schenn has had the benefit of playing in a more offensively open period to date. The statistics are not comparable.

mbow30
10-27-2011, 03:43 PM
those were two prettty sweet shots, though.

the one on leclaire was. the one on elliot sucked.

but, still, it's a lot easier to have a heavy shot when you're skating with a full head of steam.

to be good on the pp (i.e. to be a productive 40+ point defenseman) you have toproduce on the pp, and to produce on the pp you have to be able to get yoru shots through while stationary.

schenn can't do it. hell, in the game against ottawa he had a slapper stopped by a guy's stick. that should never happen.

number17
10-27-2011, 03:49 PM
Seriously guys, comparing Schenn to Pronger?

Pronger is an elite offensive defenseman ... some may not think of him as one because he's SO GOOD in everything else - defense, physical plays, big hits, leadership ...

He's an total a$$ off the ice, but this is a guy you build a team around any day of the week.

Zambini
10-27-2011, 04:04 PM
Schenn has the worst Dman slapshot from the point I've ever seen in the NHL.

JaysCyYoung
10-27-2011, 04:39 PM
I raise you Christian Laflamme and Steve Poapst.

LeafOfFaith
10-27-2011, 05:24 PM
And what happens if and when Schenn turns into a 40 - 45 point premier shutdown defender?

That's right, you'll all tell me how everyone said it would be so (not just me), and that it was clear he was on his way to achieving that.

So, let's return to this in 3 or 4 years.

LeafGm
10-27-2011, 06:13 PM
LoF, feel free to bookmark this thread, and on the day when Luke Schenn magically becomes comparable offensively to one of the dominant offensive defensemen of his era, after having thus far shown no offensive ability in either his junior or NHL careers, you can shove it in our faces to your heart's content.

Until then, "Pronger didn't score a lot of points in his first three seasons, so that means Schenn has the chance to become a top producing offensive defenseman too!!" will remain one of the funniest things I've read on this board (along with "I've never watched Chris Pronger play and thought he was dangerous offensively").

LeafOfFaith
10-27-2011, 06:34 PM
No need to skew my statement if it's so ludicrous, so let me set the record straight.

Simply put, Pronger didn't become the Pronger we all know until well into his career, and was in fact comparable to Schenn in their respective third years. It's too early to say Schenn can't turn into a 40 - 45 point premier shutdown defender, and I think there's a good chance he does (though I'm not saying it will absolutely happen). And no, aside from his shot, Pronger doesn't have scary offensive skills.

Now, if he does develop into that kind of player, we'll remember how inconceivable it was to all of you today, and we won't say we all thought it could happen.

JaysCyYoung
10-27-2011, 06:50 PM
By "well" into his career you mean four seasons right? He was on the 1998 Olympic Team.


And no, aside from his shot, Pronger doesn't have scary offensive skills.

He's the singularly best outlet passing defenceman in the league (even better than Lidstrom) and is virtually unmwatched at moving the puck around on the point during the man advantage, which is why he's one of the best PP specialists in the game. Come again?

LeafGm
10-27-2011, 06:52 PM
But don't you see how focusing entirely on Pronger and Schenn's similar first three seasons while ignoring everything else, and concluding that because Pronger went on to become an elite offensive producer that Schenn also has a chance is an extremely flawed and misleading analysis?

It's like a Ducks fan pointing out that because Brandon McMillan had a simliar NHL rookie season last year to Eric Staal and Joe Thornton's rookie seasons, that means that it's too early to say that McMillan can't also turn into an elite, franchise #1 center like Thornton and Staal.

You can't make an honest comparison without including Pronger's super-star level production in junior, which conveniently is what blows your Schenn/Pronger comparison out of the water.

JaysCyYoung
10-27-2011, 06:53 PM
And what happens if and when Schenn turns into a 40 - 45 point premier shutdown defender?

That's right, you'll all tell me how everyone said it would be so (not just me), and that it was clear he was on his way to achieving that.

So, let's return to this in 3 or 4 years.

I was the happiest person on this entire forum when we drafted Luke Schenn. LeafGM and others can attest to that fact. But you're completely out to lunch with this ridiculous attempted comparison.

LeafGm
10-27-2011, 06:57 PM
Heh, it would have been interesting if we were physically in the same room during the draft Jays. You were absolutely thrilled that we traded up to draft Schenn, while I was at the complete opposite end of the spectrum.

Still don't agree with the move Fletcher made on principle, but it's worked out decently because Schenn's developed into a good physical "shut down" guy (instead of Jeff Ware 2.0), and all of the offensive fowards selected within 10 picks after him have accomplished squat so far (or are outright busts, like Filatov).

JaysCyYoung
10-27-2011, 07:12 PM
Oh yes, I recall how upset you were at the time. As I recall, we had quite the epic confrontation in the draft thread and the various other draft-related discussions that ensued soon afterwards.

In retrospect however, it's stunning just how weak the 2008 Draft class is unfolding three and a half years after it took place. Stamkos leads all players from the class with 123 goals, that much is a given. The player with the most goals after Stamkos though? Josh Bailey with just 34 career markers, and right now he has no points through the Islanders' first seven games and appears to be on a one-way ticket back down to Bridgeport. My second choice after Schenn, Mikkel Boedker from the Kitchener Rangers, had all of four goals in thirty four games last season. The only impact forward in the making appears to be our own Joe Colborne, selected way down at sixteenth overall. What an awful collection to date.

To get a competent second-pairing NHL defenceman who has contributed three quality season's worth of play already thus far in his career with Schenn has turned out swimmingly well in retrospect.

zeke
10-27-2011, 07:14 PM
yup.

turning out to be just a pretty crappy draft class.

LeafOfFaith
10-27-2011, 07:24 PM
But don't you see how focusing entirely on Pronger and Schenn's similar first three seasons while ignoring everything else, and concluding that because Pronger went on to become an elite offensive producer that Schenn also has a chance is an extremely flawed and misleading analysis?

It's like a Ducks fan pointing out that because Brandon McMillan had a simliar NHL rookie season last year to Eric Staal and Joe Thornton's rookie seasons, that means that it's too early to say that McMillan can't also turn into an elite, franchise #1 center like Thornton and Staal.

You can't make an honest comparison without including Pronger's super-star level production in junior, which conveniently is what blows your Schenn/Pronger comparison out of the water.

You're attributing the following position to me: that BECAUSE Schenn and Pronger had a similar start to their careers, Schenn will be on his level one day.

No, not saying that. I'm saying that Schenn was projected to be, and has shown more than just a glimpse of being able to be, a top of the line shutdown defender in this league. That's why he went 5th overall, which you correctly point out was not because of his offensive skills. On that basis, I'm optimistic that he can be a premier defensive defender in this league someday soon. I also think he has 40 - 45 point ability in him, from what I've seen.

So can he consistently be a 40 - 45 point shutdown guy? I definitely think so. And given that Pronger himself wasn't anywhere near Pronger-level when he was Schenn's age (in fact, he was considered a total bust by many at that time, including me), there is plenty of time and room for Schenn to get there in the next few years. And as noted, the fact that they had similar third years is just some support for that proposition. So, if he tops out at a 45 point defensive beast, where Pronger is a 55 point defensive beast, is that enough of a difference to me to say that Schenn will never be at Pronger's level? No. I'd call them very similar if that happened.

Blueman
10-27-2011, 07:25 PM
I'd call you crazy for your comparison.

LeafOfFaith
10-27-2011, 07:28 PM
And I'd ignore you.

JaysCyYoung
10-27-2011, 07:29 PM
If Luke Schenn is named to the 2014 Canadian Olympic Team in Sochi (by which time he would be twenty four years old... basically Pronger's age in 1998) then you might be able to compare the two. It's a proper contextual reflection of how each player is perceived by this country's hockey evaluation staff.

Blueman
10-27-2011, 07:31 PM
And I'd continue to ignore the facts.

fixed that for ya

LeafOfFaith
10-27-2011, 07:34 PM
If Luke Schenn is named to the 2014 Canadian Olympic Team in Sochi (by which time he would be twenty four years old... basically Pronger's age in 1998) then you might be able to compare the two. It's a proper contextual reflection of how each player is perceived by this country's hockey evaluation staff.

First of all, who knows what happens by 2014. Maybe that actually comes to pass.

Secondly, their careers don't have to exactly track in order to one day say that Schenn is near Pronger's level.

LeafOfFaith
10-27-2011, 07:35 PM
fixed that for ya

Actually, the facts are that Schenn is almost exactly where Pronger was in his third year in the league.

All the rest is pure speculation.

JaysCyYoung
10-27-2011, 07:41 PM
First of all, who knows what happens by 2014. Maybe that actually comes to pass.

Secondly, their careers don't have to exactly track in order to one day say that Schenn is near Pronger's level.

I love Luke Schenn as much as anyone, but nonetheless he's not close to being a first-ballot Hall of Fame level.

Fitzgerald#11
10-30-2011, 02:28 PM
here was the propsed realignment shown yesterday.

http://i39.tinypic.com/sy9ky8.jpg

you face every team outside your division home and away and the rest of the games are inside your division. first 2 rounds of playoffs are within division

Killer93
10-30-2011, 02:36 PM
Wow Calgary will get ass raped in that division lol

Killer93
10-30-2011, 02:37 PM
and I love the idea of the Wings playing us more, miss that rivalry

LeafGm
10-30-2011, 02:37 PM
here was the propsed realignment shown yesterday.

http://i39.tinypic.com/sy9ky8.jpg

you face every team outside your division home and away and the rest of the games are inside your division. 1st round of playoffs are within division
So, we'd play each of the teams inside our division six times then. Which is what we already do with Montreal, Boston, Buffalo and Ottawa, but we'd just be adding Pittsburgh and Detroit (let's not kid ourselves, Columbus isn't winning that battle) to the list of teams we play six times. Not a terrible idea. I don't really see the point of keeping the 1st round within the division though. Just stay with seeding by conference, 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, etc, except we'll now only have two division winners that'll be guaranteed home ice instead of three, which is nice.

Couple of obvious issues with the way they've got things aligned though. Splitting up Pittsburgh and Philly, and having them just play twice a year is just plain stupid. Having Winnipeg in a different division than Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary also doesn't make a lot of sense; that's a few pretty natural rivalries that they're passing up the opportunity to create.

Killer93
10-30-2011, 02:39 PM
Chicago will be licking their chops in that division if its Columbus...

LeafGm
10-30-2011, 02:50 PM
...an update on that format as well. According to Elliot Friedman, the first two rounds of the playoffs would be within your division. The winners of the divisions would then face each other in the semi-finals. I guess the theory is that with that format, you'll have more first round matchups between rivals. I really don't like the idea though. Playing against rivals like Ottawa, Buffalo and Montreal (well, not that most of us have ever seen a Toronto-Montreal playoff series) would be fun, but only if it happens organically. If those matchups are forced and you keep playing the same teams over and over again, I think it's going to get stale more than it's going to intensify the rivalry.

It also adds some intrigue when two teams that don't face each other a ton get together in the playoffs, and it's really fun when it unexpectedly develops into a really intense playoff series (the Leafs/Islanders series is a prime example of this). Under this system, you're not really going to see that kind of thing too often.

hockeylover
10-30-2011, 02:51 PM
Ew, who the **** wants to play Pittsburgh and Detroit 6 times a year?

Jeremy
10-30-2011, 02:54 PM
Isn't Schenn a lot more comparable to Adam Foote than Chris Pronger?

Jeremy
10-30-2011, 02:55 PM
And isn't Dion Phaneuf more comparable to Chris Pronger than Luke Schenn is to Pronger?

LeafGm
10-30-2011, 03:15 PM
An emphatic "yes" to both questions Jeremy.

LeafOfFaith
10-30-2011, 03:22 PM
here was the propsed realignment shown yesterday.

http://i39.tinypic.com/sy9ky8.jpg

you face every team outside your division home and away and the rest of the games are inside your division. first 2 rounds of playoffs are within division

What would happen to the odd team in each conference during the playoffs?

zeke
10-30-2011, 04:39 PM
here was the propsed realignment shown yesterday.

http://i39.tinypic.com/sy9ky8.jpg

you face every team outside your division home and away and the rest of the games are inside your division. first 2 rounds of playoffs are within division

brilliant.

Fitzgerald#11
10-30-2011, 04:47 PM
NHL needs 20 of the teams to agree

also DET and CBJ both want in the East. something like 60% of there games start after 8pm locally

MindzEye
10-30-2011, 05:28 PM
For **** sakes....adding Pittsburgh & Detroit to our division? WTF?

Chicago becomes a dynasty in that shitty division they would be in, and that Pacific conference would be pure murder.

Mega
10-30-2011, 07:01 PM
Columbus needs a goalie.

zeke
10-30-2011, 07:13 PM
Columbus needs a goalie.

and a defenseman, and some scoring depth.

Volcanologist
10-30-2011, 07:38 PM
They need a new GM.

LeafGm
10-30-2011, 08:25 PM
They need a new GM.
The funny thing is, the rumours have them considering Craig Button and John Ferguson Jr. Two guys that would actually be even worse than what they've got now.

Hoss
10-30-2011, 08:37 PM
sportsnet also just mentioned that if they lost this game tonight that Hitchcock could return as head coach... egad. I wonder what Nash would think about that???

JackBurton
10-30-2011, 10:09 PM
sportsnet also just mentioned that if they lost this game tonight that Hitchcock could return as head coach... egad. I wonder what Nash would think about that???

Maclean will jump out of a window.

leafman101
10-30-2011, 10:44 PM
That realignment proposal would create some epic playoff series.

I also like that the top 4 teams from each division make the playoffs (at least thats what I'm assuming if the first 2 rounds are in the division). That offsets the bias in an unbalanced schedule.

MindzEye
10-31-2011, 12:03 AM
R...how does that offset the bias? If anything it accentuates the bias. When lesser teams can make the playoffs because of their weak division, that's not off setting the bias

leafman101
10-31-2011, 12:05 AM
Shitty teams in lesser divisions can't just make it by racking up points against weaker competition, and teams in stronger divisions aren't hurt by playing tougher teams more.

If you are playing 1/4 of the league 6 times, being in a tough/weak division would have a much greater impact on final points than it does now.

JackBurton
10-31-2011, 10:48 AM
Good time for Detroit to join the division. They have some lean years ahead. The bubble is about to burst for them.

MapleLeafBlueJayBoy
10-31-2011, 11:26 AM
I've been thinking that about Detroit for years and they always manage somehow to remain elite.

BG
10-31-2011, 11:29 AM
here was the propsed realignment shown yesterday.

http://i39.tinypic.com/sy9ky8.jpg

you face every team outside your division home and away and the rest of the games are inside your division. first 2 rounds of playoffs are within division

Clearly setting Columbus up for a move to Quebec.

Volcanologist
10-31-2011, 12:07 PM
would love to see the nords back. habs need a little provincial brother too.

Fitzgerald#11
10-31-2011, 12:31 PM
yeah CBJ for QBC for sure

still need to get DET in the East though

BG
10-31-2011, 12:43 PM
Nah leave the remnants of the Wings dynasty for the others in their division to feed on for a few years.

zeke
10-31-2011, 12:48 PM
yeah, personally, I'm not really worried about the Wings going forward.

An aging Datsyuk and Zetterberg can only do so much.

LeafOfFaith
10-31-2011, 12:56 PM
It'd be amazing for the NHL to drop Columbus and pick up Quebec again.

I think even the US teams would like it more.

LeafOfFaith
10-31-2011, 12:57 PM
Good time for Detroit to join the division. They have some lean years ahead. The bubble is about to burst for them.

We thought this when the old guard went off and retired, but look what happened.

I think first, Babcock is an amazing coach, and second, the Wings will always find good players somehow.

zeke
10-31-2011, 01:01 PM
I don't think they're pulling any more magic rabbits like Datsyuk, Zetts, and Lidstrom out of their late round draft hats any time soon.

Wayward DP
10-31-2011, 01:02 PM
Once Lidstrom retires I think they will decline... They don't really have anyone who can replace what he brings.

LeafOfFaith
10-31-2011, 01:03 PM
Then they'll sign the best UFAs, or they'll pull a rabbit out of their late first round pick. Things always go right for them.

leafman101
10-31-2011, 01:05 PM
Nah. Detroits recent history of success completely coincides with Nik Lidstrom. He's the only reason they were able to bridge the gap between two generations of teams, and once he's gone they won't be the same.

The guy is a special, irreplaceable player. One of the best ever.

Leafin'
10-31-2011, 01:09 PM
With their luck, Tomas Tatar becomes a 130pt forward.

Jeremy
10-31-2011, 01:24 PM
Nah. Detroits recent history of success completely coincides with Nik Lidstrom. He's the only reason they were able to bridge the gap between two generations of teams, and once he's gone they won't be the same.

The guy is a special, irreplaceable player. One of the best ever.Yeah man, Lindstrom is on a different level than almost every defenceman. Just a great player and a automatic Hall of Famer. Detroit was blessed to get him and hold onto him all this time.

Montana
10-31-2011, 01:25 PM
Once Lidstrom retires I think they will decline... They don't really have anyone who can replace what he brings.


#insight.

BG
10-31-2011, 03:53 PM
If Detroit can't spin gold out of Brunnstrom, I fear the party is over...

Volcanologist
10-31-2011, 04:08 PM
Heh.

Leaf fans talking smack about one of the top organizations in hockey. good stuff.

JaysCyYoung
10-31-2011, 04:37 PM
I don't think anyone is talking smack about Detroit. Then again, it's not entirely coincidental (like you seem to think) that their two decade long run of dominance started with Lidstrom's arrival in North America. I'm sure the two had nothing to do with one another though, right?

Hoss
10-31-2011, 04:47 PM
Just as New Jersey has looked like garbage since Stevens and Niedermeyer left. Lou and Brodeur don't look like GM geniuses when they're best players aren't there anymore.

LeafGm
10-31-2011, 04:54 PM
We can only hope that Detroit's fall-off will happen after Lidstrom retires, but since the scouts and management that pulled all those gems out of the draft are still working with the Wings, and they still have an owner willing to shell out whatever money is necessary to win, I won't be holding my breath. New Jersey's collapse is encouraging though.

leafman101
10-31-2011, 04:59 PM
Its not to say the Wings will never be good again, they'll still be a good team. Even if you just took Lidstrom out of the lineup now they'd be a good team.

But like Jays said, a two decade streak of being maybe the top contender in the league year in and year out? They've changed players, they've change coaches, they've changed goalies. The one thing they've yet to do is try to keep it going without one of the best defensemen to ever lace up a pair of skates.