Buppy

Neal's a repeat offender. He could easily get a couple or even more games. Had Gleny not just shrugged it off like it was nothing, I'd say he would. But with the lack of injury (or even much of a reaction) I wouldn't be at all surprised if he gets away with it. Guessing Leggy will get at least a few games, since apparently none of our guys got hurt this game.

If you mean re-signed instead of Tatar and Sheahan, or in some important capacity...Yeah. So ridiculous I don't even understand why it's being brought up so often. Zetterberg-Datsyuk-Abby Franzen-Weiss-Nyquist Tatar-Sheahan-? Miller-Helm-Andy Ferraro/Callahan/Tootoo/Emmerton That's what we have, just with guys already signed or pending RFAs who are out of exemptions (I think there's a couple other kids, but they don't seem be NHL level). Already one too many forwards, if we want to believe Ferraro and Callahan can play. There's also a chance Glendening will burn out his waiver exemptions this year. There's a world of difference between sending a kid down when you have that option and needing to waive someone. As of now, we have one hole in the lineup and could potentially create a second and third. Basically, the 4 guys at the bottom could all go. I get the sense that people want Jurco and/or Pulkkinen on the team. There is one opening in the lineup, if we don't sign any UFAs, but I think we can do better. I'd say Alfie or Legwand would be better. I just don't see how there's room to even worry about those guys. I guess it's theoretically possible, if Alfie and Legwand don't want to come back. Just seems so unlikely. (Then again, I thought it was unlikely that Miller and Cleary would be here this year, though I think Helm's injury and the apparent loss of confidence in Emmerton played a part there.)

I think I get where you're coming from. On defense, cutting loose from Kindl and/or Smith would open the door for other improvements white not getting in the way of the next wave. I'd agree there, though not necessarily that there needs to be a "permanent" decision regarding Smith just yet (or at least not if we dump Kindl). At forward, I don't think we need to make those decisions. Or more precisely, I think some of them have already been made. I think letting the old guys (Bert, Cleary, Sammy) walk has been the plan all along, so I don't see that as being any kind of change. Andersson is at the bottom of the roster, so I don't think it's particularly important what decision they make there. I could see Helm and Abby having some influence on what type of forward we try to add, but not a very big one. I don't think we're going to intentionally go looking for a forward who can't play in the top 6 because we think Abby can do it. I think what we add at forward will be determined by what's available and what we can afford, with some consideration to the fact that Jurco and Pulkkinen are out of options after next year (and neither of them is a penalty killer so we can't slot them in for guys like Miller, Andy, Glendening). Then the decisions regarding team roles will be made afterward.

Tied with Legwand for 7th actually. And possibly behind Weiss, Helm, Sheahan, and Jurco had they been healthy/played a full year. There's just no room for him here. About the only spot we could make for him would be in place of Abby, which negates the additional physical play. If he could kill penalties I'd be all for it, but unless Vancouver wants to give him away I'd have to pass.

Not sure it was really all that clear after last season, but regardless; Bert, Sammy, and Tootoo were all signed before last season and unfortunately we weren't able to buy out any of them. And for some perspective, since it's a little too easy to judge solely on hindsight, stats for Bert and Sammy prior to signing their latest deals: Bert: 71gp, 14g, 38p Sammy: 54gp, 14g, 31p (Even Tootoo was coming off a 30p season, though I think he was signed for a completely different role, and scoring wasn't really a factor.) They were signed as depth/complementary scorers. Short-term, I believe precisely because of the kids. And it's not like they're in their 50s or anything, and we should have had any reason to suspect they would both miss basically a full year injured, and then be so ineffective after (though I'd say Bert hasn't been horrible). Would have been nice had they been one year deals, but I'd say it was only injuries that really made that an issue.

Heh, our defense this year has a combined 22 goals and 112 points. Nick and Rafi combined for: 07-08: 23g, 125p 08-09: 26g, 118p 09-10: 17g, 91p 10-11: 20g, 110p Rest of our defense added: 07-08: 17g, 79p 08-09: 19g, 106p 09-10: 19g, 73p 10-11: 21g, 96p I wouldn't really consider that an overhaul. Looking at our UFAs, only Alfie and Quincey really play an important role. Sammy was barely even part of the team. Likely wouldn't have been had we been able to buy him out. Had we been able to, Nyquist probably would have been up all year. So we can consider that spot already filled. Cleary was, I believe, resigned at least in part due to Helm's lingering injury from last year. Sheahan being out of options takes his spot (I assume you want to bring back Sheahan and Tatar). Then we have a spot at the bottom of the forward roster, formerly filled by Eaves, Tootoo, Glendening, Emmerton, etc., and the spots of Bert in the bottom 6 and Alfie in the top 6. It's hard to consider Legwand's position, since he's only here because of all the injuries. He doesn't really have his own spot, he's just a stand-in for Zetterberg. So three spots; one at the bottom, one in the middle and one at the top (low-end of the top at least). Hardly a "new face", whether we fill any or all with new UFAs. Same goes for filling the #4 defenseman spot or backup goalie, as well as the third pair. Even if you fill all 7 of those spots with new people I don't think it really changes the complexion of the team all that much. At least no more than just tweaking those two important spots.

I'd say I should have been more clear. Maybe I should have said "personnel decisions" rather than organizational philosophy. I don't think missing or making the playoffs will affect any of those decisions. Some aren't decisions that need to be made, some will be made by simple necessity, some are just unimportant. We're a team in transition, and it's absurd to think our management doesn't realize that. I think we're an organization that wants to remain competetive, but also committed to building through the draft. And I think we'll continue to try to balance both, until we either transition back into a contender or into a team that's much less feasible to keep competetive. There is no sure-fire formula for building a cup team. If there was, sure...do that. But there isn't. Our philosophy, which seems to be, "try to scrape by as best we can while hoarding youth and hoping for the best", may not sound very good. But really it's no less likely to work than anything else we might try, and if it does work it likely means another long period of being a contender. That's not really true. Prior to this year, the only "stop-gap" type players we've had have been in minor roles. Alfie is really the first to play a somewhat key role, and even he was only our 4th forward (maybe even 5th). White and Quincey I think were more due to a lack of options rather than an unwillingness to make a bigger commitment. And just out of curiosity, what would your idea of "an overhaul" be?

I don't think missing the playoffs or not will have any impact on our organizational philosophy. And given the lack of changes in your lineup, it seems you don't even want it to. Changing two spots in the lineup isn't really a serious house cleaning, especially if your just swapping one past-his-prime vet for a different past-his-prime vet. But I too like the stop-gap approach, especially on defense, though I think we need two (replacing Q and Kindl, pushing Lashoff into the 7 spot). I wouldn't want Jurco up to start next year unless he can prove he'd be better than any potential UFA, or we make a trade that opens up a spot. Barring trades, I think we have two forward spots for one year (placeholders for Jurco and Pulkkinen), though I think we can be flexible there if we can land someone good. On defense, two spots for two years. More only if it's someone better than what we think Smith will be.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=709143

18-3-6 when leading after 2. While we've been pretty terrible at comebacks, at least we're tied for the fewest number of games trailing. (With Anaheim, who is 2-13-1)

4th actually. Pens first by a good margin, followed by Tampa and Anaheim. Also 4th in average minutes of injured players (Pens, Carolina, Ducks) Wings are first in CHIP (cap hit of injured players). Data from http://springingmalik.blogspot.com/2014/03/nhl-man-games-lost-and-chip-analysis-60.html

Anywhere from the end of March to the end of May

Fortunately, players come in more than two varieties so it's not really an either/or scenario. You want some good scorers (your Datsyuks and Zetterbergs), some secondary scorers (Franzen, Nyquist, Tatar), some complimentary players (basically someone cheap, not necessarily good on their own, but able to play alongside skilled guys and provide decent production - Bert, Cleary, Homer types, in better seasons, Abby), some two-way guys (secondary/tertiary scorer that also provides good defense - Flip, Weiss, possibly Helm, Sheahan), and finish off with some solid checkers (cheap guy, solid defense/PK ability and/or high energy/physicality - Miller, Glenny, Andy). Then try to piece it all together to get a balanced attack with all four lines able to chip in some offense. Something like: Good/secondary scorer - Good scorer - Complimentary guy Secondary scorer - Good scorer - Complimentary guy Secondary scorer - Two-way guy - Checker Secondary/Checker - Two-way guy - Checker Obviously can be shuffled around based on exact personnel and their positions, and player chemistry, and some players might fit in multiple categories. Basically, I think if a team has Cup aspirations they need to get at least decent production from the third line, and occasional production from the 4th. A team like Pittsburgh is going to struggle more often than not in the playoffs, and most teams that try to build that way aren't going to have players as good as Crosby and Malkin, especially trying to build through trades and UFAs. With Pav and Hank healthy, I think we have the "good scorers" covered, but of course the more the merrier and one more would sure be nice due to injury concerns. Secondary scoring is our biggest strength, along with checkers. Complimentary guys, mostly Bert and Abby this year, could use improvement. Alfie and/or Legwand could fit in those spots if they came cheap enough. Our two-ways are maybe a little weak, but mostly just from injuries. To afford it all, the checkers and complimentary guys should be pretty cheap and you need a few others on bargain deals (easiest with young players on 1st or 2nd contracts), with the rest ranging from mid-level to high. Reality complicates all of that. Getting the right guys isn't easy. Sometimes they're just not available, and even if they are someone else might get them first. Then you have to fit them all under the cap and hope they all gel with each other and your coaching staff and philosophy.

No problem. One other note is "Professional games" means games in any pro league, not just the NHL. AHL, ECHL, and any European pro leagues all count. For a player signed at age 20 or older, the first season he plays one pro game counts as their first season of exemption, and every season thereafter counts even if they don't play any pro games. The rules are different for players signed at 18 or 19; the first year of their contract is their first year of exemption even if they only play in juniors.

Waiver status is determined by a few factors: The players age during the first season of their first NHL contract sets the number of years or games played the player has to reach before losing their exemption. Once a player plays that number of NHL games, or after that number of seasons (regardless of whether the player is in the NHL or not), the player then has to clear waivers. In Almquist's case, he signed his first contract at age 20, for the 2011-12 season. This gave him 3 years or 160 games (the games were then reduced due to the lockout, but that's not a factor in his case). This is his third pro season, so he needs to clear waivers next year. There are some tricky parts to the waiver rules, mostly pertaining to players who sign at 18/19 and play in the NHL. Easiest way to check waiver status is with http://capgeek.com/waiver-calculator/. Just note that the "To date" line does not include this season, so if it says the player has 1 year left, it means they would need to clear next year.

Jurco is not one of our best players. Debatable that he's even one of the best healthy players. He's been decent overall, and nicely productive his last few games. Though for his time up as a whole he's only been the third best player on his line. Pulkkinen, as well as he's doing in GR, hasn't played a game in the NHL. If you have all the kids up, you don't even have any room for a "real quality UFA", and very few options to call up in case of injuries. Starters Pav-Hank-Franzen Nyquist-Weiss-Pulu Jurco-Sheahan-Tatar Abby-Helm-Andy Bench Miller-Glendening/Callahan/Ferraro/Emmerton/Tootoo Call-ups Probably Mantha and Athanasiou, maybe Frk, longshot Tvrdon That lineup is already light on good PKers, having to rely on two of Abby, Sheahan, or Weiss, or have Pav and Hank waste energy doing it. And the call-ups are very questionable, considering literally none of them have done anything in even the AHL yet. And if you add a "real quality UFA", where do you put him/them? The only logical spot is in for Pulkkinen and/or Jurco. I can understand if you want better UFAs than Legwand and Alfie, but there's not really a good argument for having Pulu and Jurco on the roster, unless they can somehow show they'd be better than any potential UFAs. Personally, I like the idea of a stopgap solution, just like with the defense. Sign a couple guys for a year so there's room the next year for those two. Alfie and Legwand are good options for that. Alternatively, a couple good two-way guys (or at least one) would make some other guys expendable. Now, if there's some kind of trade it might open up a spot, and if a big enough upgrade it might be worth losing the depth in GR. Helm + Tatar (though not much more) for Kesler? Sure. Jurco makes that viable, and I think we'd be enough better to risk having one fewer call-up option. (Unfortunately, it will probably take two more years plus a surprise Henrik Sedin trade before Vancouver actually moves Kesler...)

Kronwall was better all-around than Rafi, just wasn't a better partner for Nick. And the list of defensemen that weren't as good as Lidstrom back then included everyone, with only a very few even being debatable. If Lidstrom is your standard for a #1 defenseman, I think you'll spend the rest of your life disappointed.

He barely played last year. I think he's played well since getting back into the lineup, and not just as a backboard for Franzen to bounce goals off of. He has been pretty ineffective for most of the year though, and I don't think he'll be back. I'd say there's basically zero chance of Pulkkinen being on the roster. He'll likely get a call-up or three, but there's no reason to rush him. He's more valuable as injury insurance, and should develop better playing a top role in GR. I'd say there's a very good chance Jurco goes back to GR as well, for the same reasons. Glendening has 23 games of exemption left. If we make the playoffs, he may use those up. Even if he doesn't he may be back in a PK role, but there's a fair chance he could start in GR. Callahan, despite playing well this year, has got to be considered a longshot to make the team. I'd expect him (and Ferraro and Emmerton) to get a chance in camp, but I wouldn't expect anything more. So we have 1-3 openings at forward. I think there's a good chance Legwand and Alfie are both back, and possibly another UFA.

Unfortunately, this doesn't look like a great draft for centers. Trading up would be nice, but Draisaitl probably goes top 5/6 and I don't think we have the pieces for that, unless we want to talk about trading Pav or Hank (or maybe Mantha). Could be a good time to trade down, possibly grab a couple guys like Bleackley, Fabbri, Ho-sang, De Leo...

Not for five years. I don't want any defenseman for more than two years unless they're exceptionally good. We already have Kronwall and Ericsson, Dekeyser probably, Smith possibly. Even Kindl signed for three more years. Then we have five (six if you want to count Nedomlel) kids who come due after two more years, plus Almquist this summer. Go after a vet stopgap or two, for one or two years, leave at least a couple spots for the kids. There will always be other UFAs if we have a hole to fill.

21 points should be easy enough, but probably wouldn't get us in the playoffs. Probably need 26 - 28. Doable, even missing Pav for half our remaining games, but tough. Btw, we've only been missing Datsyuk or Zetterberg for about 60% of the year, and I think only 2 games missing both at the same time. And I don't think anyone was opposed to moving someone for a proven star, just not 2-3 guys currently contributing on the roster, plus other prospects/picks. Vanek, seeing what he actually went for, would have been nice, but we had a bigger need for a center. No other good centers got moved, certainly not one that could be considered a star.

Seriously? Not long ago you didn't think enough of Jarnkrok to even include him in our list of prospects...

Really can't get much closer than OT in game 7. Regardless of what would have happened if Chicago (or Anaheim) had played their best the whole series, or how easily they might have had it had they been more "serious", the fact is we were one shot away from beating them. One lucky bounce, one good snipe, one little mistake from them... False dilemma. Realistically, this trade probably means next to nothing in regards to our future. We were desperate for an NHL center. We got one. Maybe at a steep price, depending on what Jarnkrok does. It may or may not help in the short term, May or may not create other options in the future. Most likely it doesn't make much difference to anything.

Did Isles fans hate him? Could have been a good addition, though not someone I'd be interested in long-term.

That's not really how it works. The cap never actually comes off, we can just go over the cap by the same amount. However, we can't save any of it that we don't spend. So we can't claim it until we're spending it.