• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Guest mindfly

Hawks sign Fernando Pisani, $500k

Rate this topic

50 posts in this topic

His best season was in 06 where he scored 18 goals and 37 points.

Since then his production and games played have steadily gone down. Last season he was a -16 in 40 games, a career worst.

This guy is a bargain buy. Nothing much to see from this signing, good or bad.

No one is saying he'll be a superstar. But at league minimum he is a good signing for a team whose bottom 6 is otherwise full of rookies and Kopecky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is saying he'll be a superstar. But at league minimum he is a good signing for a team whose bottom 6 is otherwise full of rookies and Kopecky.

I thought Kopecky is in the top six with his buddy Hossa?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

who else sees Cheechoo-Emery-Pisani fourth line... I have a feeling Ray Emery would be a great center... this feeling of course is souly based on my sick carny since of humor, but not withstanding, STRONG CORE. :siren: :siren: :siren: :siren: :siren: :siren:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't kept up with Pisani in the past few years, but if he still plays anything like he did with Edmonton in 06 playoffs, he's a good bargain at 500k. Nice bottom 6 player who can do a little if everything. I'd rather have him at 500k then Miller or Eaves at 850k.

Wow. I can't believe some of the mentality here.

Eaves scored 22 points in 65 games last season and was one of Wings best PKers. Miller scored 19 points in 66 games with the Wings and was one of the best PKers. Pisani's big accomplishment was he was healthy enough to plays 40 games last season and was minus 16.

You're insane if you truly believe what you wrote.

mjlegend and dobbles like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is pointing out previous success and ability in any way guaranteeing it to be a good signing? I was simply saying that before his injuries he was an effective third line player, and despite what the past few years have shown, it's not really out of the realm of possibility for him to return to part of his previous form. If the Wing's had had that mindset on players like Larry Murphy, Patrick Eaves or Dan Cleary, none would have become Wings. Seeing as the Hawks are essentially giving him AHL money, I fail to see how this is a bad signing in any way, as the rewards far outweigh the risks. No one said that they expected him to score 14 goals in 24 games like he did in the playoffs.

If he can get his disease in check, he could very well be a good bottom 6 forward far more capable of any of the other AHL scrubs. Despite his horrific 5 on 5 stats, he WAS Edmonton's best forward PKer last year.

holy back-peddle batman!

on the first page you were gushing about how much of a steal it was and how you would prefer him to eaves or miller. yet then when people call you out on the absurdity of the statement, you try to play semantics and pretend you never said things. worst of all you basically admit you haven't watched the guy in several years, yet you then go on to pretend you know all about his career. make up your mind!

IMO, this signing may be a slight upgrade over some random AHL guy, but certainly not anything noteworthy. and definitely not the type of great signing multiple posters on the first page claimed. the guy has put up maltby like numbers the last couple years and we all know how popular he is around here...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was 25th of 33 players in that category. And only played half the season.

To be fair, you should remove the guys that played 5 games and had a better +/-.

If you take all the players on the team that played in at least 37 games (gotta get Souray in there), there are 21 players, with Pisani finishing right in the middle. His +/- was worse than 10 guys and better than 10 guys.

There is no question that this guy's value has plummeted do to his bad luck in the health department, but there is also no question that there is potential for the contract to be an absolute bargain. Seriously, he couldn't have signed for any less than he did, so how can it be anything other than a potential bargain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

holy back-peddle batman!

on the first page you were gushing about how much of a steal it was and how you would prefer him to eaves or miller. yet then when people call you out on the absurdity of the statement, you try to play semantics and pretend you never said things. worst of all you basically admit you haven't watched the guy in several years, yet you then go on to pretend you know all about his career. make up your mind!

IMO, this signing may be a slight upgrade over some random AHL guy, but certainly not anything noteworthy. and definitely not the type of great signing multiple posters on the first page claimed. the guy has put up maltby like numbers the last couple years and we all know how popular he is around here...

Holy poor reading comprehension batman.

I said it was a potential steal if he could regain a certain form of play. Don't see what the big deal is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is saying he'll be a superstar. But at league minimum he is a good signing for a team whose bottom 6 is otherwise full of rookies and Kopecky.

It's not a good signing though. It's desperation. They need plugs to ice a team, and they figure "why not, maybe he can stay healthy and somehow revert back in age and performance 4 years. It's just a signing. No good, no bad. It's no strategy, he was probably the one who returned their calls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a good signing though. It's desperation. They need plugs to ice a team, and they figure "why not, maybe he can stay healthy and somehow revert back in age and performance 4 years. It's just a signing. No good, no bad. It's no strategy, he was probably the one who returned their calls.

So you honestly think that Pisani at 500k is no better then an AHL plug at 500k? The whole possibility of him reverting into a good player alone makes this a good signing, as the Hawks are virtually out nothing, and potentially getting a player worth far more then 500k. I know you can't really say if a signing was good or bad until the contract is up in hindsight, but us as fans should be allowed to note that a move could be potentially good, even if it was done by ....*gasp*... the Hawks. This signing reminds me a lot of the Dan Cleary and Patrick Eaves signings, and fans should not be vindicated for seeing what the Hawks were hoping in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jason Gregor twitter:

"Pisani signs with the Hawks. One way deal for $500,000. He told me the Hawks want him in a checking role but will get other chances as well."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you honestly think that Pisani at 500k is no better then an AHL plug at 500k? The whole possibility of him reverting into a good player alone makes this a good signing, as the Hawks are virtually out nothing, and potentially getting a player worth far more then 500k. I know you can't really say if a signing was good or bad until the contract is up in hindsight, but us as fans should be allowed to note that a move could be potentially good, even if it was done by ....*gasp*... the Hawks. This signing reminds me a lot of the Dan Cleary and Patrick Eaves signings, and fans should not be vindicated for seeing what the Hawks were hoping in it.

I still don't see how this contract is any better than either of the Miller/Eaves contracts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't see how this contract is any better than either of the Miller/Eaves contracts.

I don't see a signficant difference between these players and Pisani's contract is cheaper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see a signficant difference between these players and Pisani's contract is cheaper.

Pisani is an injury prone PK specialist/former playoff performer and has been getting worse since 2007.

Eaves and Miller are healthy regular season 4th line players with more offensive upside and if I'm not mistaken either can play the PK.

I don't like that both were signed but if I had to choose either of those two or Pisani I would choose the former.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate it when people talk about a signing by pointing out how a player played 4 or 5 seasons ago. Seriously? He may very well be good, I don't know. But when I hear "if so and so plays the way they did back in '06 or '07 (or even '03 I've heard), it's a good signing" that indicates that player has done nothing since then.

If Gordie Howe played like he did back in 1955, he would be a great signing at league minimum! An absolute steal!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you honestly think that Pisani at 500k is no better then an AHL plug at 500k? The whole possibility of him reverting into a good player alone makes this a good signing, as the Hawks are virtually out nothing, and potentially getting a player worth far more then 500k. I know you can't really say if a signing was good or bad until the contract is up in hindsight, but us as fans should be allowed to note that a move could be potentially good, even if it was done by ....*gasp*... the Hawks. This signing reminds me a lot of the Dan Cleary and Patrick Eaves signings, and fans should not be vindicated for seeing what the Hawks were hoping in it.

This is absolutely nothing like the Cleary / Eaves deal. Not even in the slightest. I question your hockey intelligence when you say off the wall stupid stuff like this.

Cleary was 26 / 27 years old when Holland signed him; Pisani is 33 going on 34. Cleary played more games in one season than Pisani has played in the past two.

Eaves was 26 when Holland signed him; Pisani is 33 going on 34. Eaves played more games in one season than Pisani has played in the past two.

Imagine if Holland didn't re-sign Miller and Eaves, and instead used the funds to sign CheeChoo for $1 mil to round out the 4th line. LGW would have an epic meltdown, and rightfully so. But you would probably be here defending the signing because CheeChoo was awesome 4 years ago, while disregarding that his body and health is completely gone.

Your posts make no sense.

dobbles and Hockeytown0001 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. I can't believe some of the mentality here.

Eaves scored 22 points in 65 games last season and was one of Wings best PKers. Miller scored 19 points in 66 games with the Wings and was one of the best PKers. Pisani's big accomplishment was he was healthy enough to plays 40 games last season and was minus 16.

You're insane if you truly believe what you wrote.

Ditto, and neither Eaves nor Miller make 850K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. I can't believe some of the mentality here.

Eaves scored 22 points in 65 games last season and was one of Wings best PKers. Miller scored 19 points in 66 games with the Wings and was one of the best PKers. Pisani's big accomplishment was he was healthy enough to plays 40 games last season and was minus 16.

You're insane if you truly believe what you wrote.

I love how you conveinatly leave out Miller's 14 game stint with Tampa in which he recorded NO points and was a -3. Makes you wonder how much playing on a good team with a better record influences/motivates a player, huh? In addition, despite all of Pisani's injuries and inferior linemates his stats prorated would be mearly 3 points less of Miller's total production. When you factor in ice time and linemates, Pisani would almost have certainly surpassed Miller's production.

Couple that with the fact that Pisani's goals agaisnt average per 60 min of pk time was FAR BELOW that of both Miller's and Eave's, despite being on a DRASTICALLY worse team, and it becomes harder and harder to argue that Miller outplayed him enough to warrent that much more money last year.

You are looking at simply the stat line, instead of situational statistics such as quality of oppositsiton faced (hint... Pisani was the highest on the Oilers), and quality of linemates + Ice time. I suggest you dig deeper into the stats before you throw out ones that our clearly unfair to compare.

Edited by EZBAKETHAGANGSTA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is absolutely nothing like the Cleary / Eaves deal. Not even in the slightest. I question your hockey intelligence when you say off the wall stupid stuff like this.

Cleary was 26 / 27 years old when Holland signed him; Pisani is 33 going on 34. Cleary played more games in one season than Pisani has played in the past two.

Eaves was 26 when Holland signed him; Pisani is 33 going on 34. Eaves played more games in one season than Pisani has played in the past two.

Imagine if Holland didn't re-sign Miller and Eaves, and instead used the funds to sign CheeChoo for $1 mil to round out the 4th line. LGW would have an epic meltdown, and rightfully so. But you would probably be here defending the signing because CheeChoo was awesome 4 years ago, while disregarding that his body and health is completely gone.

Your posts make no sense.

Considering both Eaves and Cleary were signed off what many considered "bad years" I feel it is a fair comparison for a risk vs reward type signing. Yes Pisani is older, but 34 is hardly considered washed up in the leauge anymore, and while he has had problems with injuries, it is not inconciviable for him to regain some of his old form. Seeing as Pisani WAS Edm's best Pker last year, and has shown comprabable offensive upside as Cleary was showing before he became a Wing (by 26 you generally have a good idea of how good a player will get, obviously not at it's peak, but a good idea), I really fail to see how this can't be used as a decent comparison. All 3 players were down on their luck for a few years after showing obvious potential, and then were signed to cheap, minimal contracts for a risk vs reward type deal. Seeing as how despite playing well below 100% with inferior linemates and Icetime, Pisani's ppg ratio was less then 3 points off of Miller's for the entire season (19 vs 16), I really don't see how you can make a claim that Miller was so good to warrant getting paid that much more then Pisani. If Pisani was given Miller's minutes and linemates, he would most probably have outscored him, and the gap between goals allowed per 60 minutes of penatly kill time would have most probably widened more in Pisani's favor.

No one is expecting Pisani to be a superstar, or even hit 15 goals, but for a 500k signing, he sure as hell beats some AHL scrub.

Also, please leave your ridiculous name calling out of this, and stop putting words in my mouth. To act as if I would want Chechoo here instead of Eaves and Miller is ridiulous,as is comparing wanting Pisani on the 4th line to wanting Cheechoo on the 4th line.

For one Cheechoo never was a good penatly killer and suited for a bottom 6 role(which despite what his numbers show, is still a strong point for Pisani), as well as the fact that he would most probably demand far more money, and has dropped far higher from his peak then Pisani had.

Edited by EZBAKETHAGANGSTA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how you conveinatly leave out Miller's 14 game stint with Tampa in which he recorded NO points and was a -3. Makes you wonder how much playing on a good team with a better record influences/motivates a player, huh? In addition, despite all of Pisani's injuries and inferior linemates his stats prorated would be mearly 3 points less of Miller's total production. When you factor in ice time and linemates, Pisani would almost have certainly surpassed Miller's production.

Couple that with the fact that Pisani's goals agaisnt average per 60 min of pk time was FAR BELOW that of both Miller's and Eave's, despite being on a DRASTICALLY worse team, and it becomes harder and harder to argue that Miller outplayed him enough to warrent that much more money last year.

You are looking at simply the stat line, instead of situational statistics such as quality of oppositsiton faced (hint... Pisani was the highest on the Oilers), and quality of linemates + Ice time. I suggest you dig deeper into the stats before you throw out ones that our clearly unfair to compare.

Pisani averaged more ice time than both Miller and Eaves. And while Edmonton was certainly terrible, neither Eaves nor Miller were playing with particularly great linemates all the time. May, Maltby, Draper, Helm, Abby, Williams, Leino...not that much different from Horcoff, O'Sullivan, Moreau, Gagner, etc. Miller may have played a bit with the likes of Flip and Cleary, but you're acting like he spent the year on the top line with Pav and Hank or something.

And I'm not sure what kind of math you're doing, but Pisani was on the ice for 10 PPGA in 91:42 (~6.5/60 min). Eaves was 13 in 147:54 (5.3), Miller was 7 in 120:31 (3.6).

Pisani is 33, hasn't played more than 56 games in the past three seasons. He had one decent season and a great playoff, and has been going downhill ever since.

Miller is 26, coming off his first full season in the NHL, and makes only $150k more.

Eaves is also 26, just had somewhat of a bounce-back season after two down years, and makes only $250k more.

Not saying Pisani is terrible, or that it isn't a good signing. He's fine for a 4th line role. But I'd much rather have the younger guys without potentially problematic diseases, even if they do make a little more money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0