chaps80 1,591 Report post Posted October 12, 2017 3 minutes ago, kickazz said: Don't overthink it. He's a backup that is being given a shot to prove himself from time to time. At this point, that’s pretty much what it is. If Howard keeps playing well, play him. If he regresses or is injured, Mrazek will get his chance. What Sajatko said in the offseason about Howard starting 50 games though, seems like a bit much for him. Could happen, but they need spacing out. If they can go 2 for 1 every three games and always alternate back to backs, that would be perfect. No need to push Howard hard. Need both goalies playing well this season and ready to go. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted October 12, 2017 6 hours ago, chaps80 said: At this point, that’s pretty much what it is. If Howard keeps playing well, play him. If he regresses or is injured, Mrazek will get his chance. What Sajatko said in the offseason about Howard starting 50 games though, seems like a bit much for him. Could happen, but they need spacing out. If they can go 2 for 1 every three games and always alternate back to backs, that would be perfect. No need to push Howard hard. Need both goalies playing well this season and ready to go. You realise that would work out to more than 50 games for Howard right? If Howard got 2 games every 3, he would get approximately 55 starts, leaving Mrazek with 27... Howard has been unreal. Hopefully he keeps it up. Mrazek was great last game too, aside from that one duster he let in. If he can prevent them, and Howard can stay healthy, we'll have one hell of a duo that should be able to (continue to) steal us some games. 1 chaps80 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rick D 350 Report post Posted October 12, 2017 23 hours ago, The Datsyukian Deke said: - that top line makes no sense..change mantha and tatar, both nyquist and tatar with Z lacks too much size plus they are too similar. I was thinking this same thing about the top line. It looks like everyone is looking to set-up someone else. I wonder if Z on the 2nd line setting up Frk and Mantha would make more sense. Larkin on the 1st line would add a bit of speed, and it would keep Tatar and Nyquist from deferring to Z all the time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted October 12, 2017 13 hours ago, chaps80 said: He could have given AA a bit more and still signed Daley. Could have skipped out on Witkowski, and I dunno what ever became of the Sheahan to Pittsburgh trade that was apparantly very close to a done deal. That could have freed up cap too. There’s apparently lots of interest in Sheahan, but for some reason it seems Holland won’t pull the trigger on a trade. The amount he is offering AA is pretty much in line with what other teams have signed similar aged similar producing young forwards for though. Either his agent hasn’t explained that to him, or he just doesn’t care. Who knows. Just not a player I’d like to lose is all. The AA trade to Pittsburgh was rumored to be contingent on AA signing. AA signs, Sheahan goes. Not Sheahan goes, then we try to sign AA only to have him go to Switzerland/Olympics anyway 1 chaps80 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chaps80 1,591 Report post Posted October 12, 2017 9 hours ago, krsmith17 said: You realise that would work out to more than 50 games for Howard right? If Howard got 2 games every 3, he would get approximately 55 starts, leaving Mrazek with 27... Howard has been unreal. Hopefully he keeps it up. Mrazek was great last game too, aside from that one duster he let in. If he can prevent them, and Howard can stay healthy, we'll have one hell of a duo that should be able to (continue to) steal us some games. This is true. I just did quick math in my head. 50/32 split would be ideal. Just saying give Howard a break more often. Might avoid the yearly injury(s). Or ride him hard and chance it, whatever. 5 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said: The AA trade to Pittsburgh was rumored to be contingent on AA signing. AA signs, Sheahan goes. Not Sheahan goes, then we try to sign AA only to have him go to Switzerland/Olympics anyway Ahh OK. Didn’t see mention of that anywhere. Figured AA had his number in mind, and if he was given it, was going to sign. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083 Report post Posted October 13, 2017 On 10/11/2017 at 7:04 PM, ChristopherReevesLegs said: This abomination was at the game last night Big Witkowski hit Can you imagine what the front looks like? Half Winged wheel/half Moo-terus? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083 Report post Posted October 13, 2017 21 hours ago, chaps80 said: He could have given AA a bit more and still signed Daley. Could have skipped out on Witkowski, and I dunno what ever became of the Sheahan to Pittsburgh trade that was apparantly very close to a done deal. That could have freed up cap too. There’s apparently lots of interest in Sheahan, but for some reason it seems Holland won’t pull the trigger on a trade. The amount he is offering AA is pretty much in line with what other teams have signed similar aged similar producing young forwards for though. Either his agent hasn’t explained that to him, or he just doesn’t care. Who knows. Just not a player I’d like to lose is all. Sheahan makes just over 2. AA wants minimum 2.5. Even if Holland traded Sheahan, his cap hit still increased by at least 500K. Would not have been enough to sign Daley. Had he not signed Witkowski, then yes he probably could have, but he still has to have a roster minimum of 22 players. He still would have had to add another skater whether it be Thunderbeard, Bert, Sproul, whoever, and I don't think the cap space was there. Don't get me wrong, I would like the whole thing to be over too, but we need Daley a lot more than AA right now. Good debate sir. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
