krsmith17

Member
  • Content count

    3,319
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    46

krsmith17 last won the day on February 17

krsmith17 had the most liked content!

7 Followers

About krsmith17

  • Rank
    Hall-of-Famer
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Paradise, Newfoundland

Recent Profile Visitors

6,410 profile views
  1. I agree. I don't think we're as far away as some people like to make it seem. With a few key moves we could go from bottom 5 back to the playoffs within a year, and possibly even back in the mix as a contender within 2-3 years. We need to offload a couple bad contracts (Howard and Ericsson), and acquire a top pair defenseman. That along with a top 3-5 pick in this year's draft, could put us on the right path going forward. It's not going to be easy, but it is doable, I'm just not sure if Holland is the right man to rebuild this team. I guess we'll get a pretty good idea in the next few days what he's capable of...
  2. Jurco did show his skill set on the ice. His performance on most nights was good, certainly not bad enough to be the scratch after every game. He did look good when the puck was on his stick, and more often than not made smart plays. You're right though, it was more than just stats, and I believe it was also more than just on-ice performance, it must have been attitude, lack of intensity in practice, or something else behind the scenes. There's just no other explanation for the utter mismanagement in my opinion...
  3. Nyquist and Tatar were never expected to change their game and become "grinders", nor were they ever played on the 4th line with scrubs. Nyquist and Tatar were put in a position to succeed right from the get-go, Jurco was not. He was mismanaged worse than I've ever seen. I think the fact that he was a big kid (6'1" over 200lbs.) went against him. If he were a smaller player, like the aforementioned, he would have never been expected to play a grinding game, and he would have had more of an opportunity to show of his skill. He will get that opportunity now in Chicago and I think he's will surprise a lot of people. I think a lot of people would agree with the above, but maybe not what I'm about to say... A bit of a bold statement, but I truly believe that if Jurco were utilized properly, and given the same opportunity as the likes of Nyquist and Tatar, he would have been as good or better than both... The talent is definitely there, so I'm excited for him to get an opportunity in Chicago.
  4. I complete agree with the bolded, and I've never suggested otherwise. That's part of the reason I want nothing to do with Shattenkirk at the deadline. The position we're in now, we should be selling off whatever players we can (not adding), in return for assets (prospects / picks). When I've talked about going after that top pairing / number one defenseman, I'm talking about after the season, sometime this summer. So again I'll ask, how do you suggest we go about trying to add that elusive number one? Hope one of our current prospects exceed expectations? Hope we find a steal in the draft? I think the best way is via trade. There's going to be a lot going on this summer, a lot more trading than usual with the expansion draft, so Kenny needs to be calling every GM to see what may be available. Maybe Cheveldayoff is willing to move Trouba to allow his team to protect more players, maybe Murray is willing to move Fowler for the same reason, maybe Treliving is willing to move one of their many stud defenseman they have in their system...
  5. Yeah, let's just hope someone in our system becomes that number one guy... The problem with that is we don't have a single prospect on the back end that projects to be anything close to that... Cholowski is arguably our best defensive prospect, and I don't think he has a ceiling any higher than a number 2... If we want to add a legit top pairing guy in the next couple seasons, it's going to have to be via trade. Trouba may be a long shot, but what number one defenseman isn't? Out of the guys that have been rumored to be "available", I think Trouba or Fowler may be the most realistic options. What do you suggest our game plan be to add a top pairing / number one defenseman?
  6. But he gave up a third rounder, so he must believe what he's saying or he wouldn't have made the trade... and quite frankly, I think he's right...
  7. There's no guarantee Shattenkirk would sign with us after the trade though, and then we lose a lot of quality assets for what? A month of Shattenkirk? No thanks. And really, why would this years top free agent want to sign with a rebuilding team? I think regardless where he is traded at the deadline he will test free agency this summer, which is exactly why teams are so reluctant to pay such a high price for a rental.
  8. I think it's a lot more likely that Jurco turns it around in Chicago, than anything in the 85-90 range becoming an impact NHLer. Jurco never did get a legit shot here and he likely never would, so I guess in that sense it's a good trade. I just wish as a rebuilding team we would trade off some of the older players, not the 24 year old kid...
  9. Love Jurco, wish he was given more of an opportunity in Detroit. I think he will prove to be well worth the pick for Chicago.
  10. Yes I am "for real". I see a ton of potential in him, so yes that would lead ME to believe 30 points is attainable.
  11. If he gets regular ice time, I don't think 30 points next year is at all out of the question. Kid has the skill, just needs the opportunity. I think the Hawks are smart enough to give him that opportunity.
  12. Not going to lie, really disappointed to lose Jurco. I think he will do really well in Chicago. Good Luck Jurco!
  13. I'm okay with this. I don't think he has been as amaze-balls as some here seem to think. I'd like to either sign another guy on a cheap, one year contract, similar to Vanek and hope he exceeds expectations, and flip him at the deadline for pick(s) / prospect(s), or just go full on youth movement. Regardless, Vanek MUST be traded at the deadline to the highest bidder.
  14. Nah, I wouldn't do it unless we can offload both Ericsson and Howard. Otherwise, I'd let another team overpay for him...
  15. I personally wouldn't offer him anything more than what Green is currently making, maybe tack on a couple extra years... $30M over 5 years...