On Callahan, yes we may want him back. But does he want to return? What else can he do in the AHL? he is blocked with the RW's and may want to go to another team where he would get a shot at the NHL. If Svech goes back to junior the is a need for him with the Griffs.
Callahan is RFA. He doesn't have much choice. Barring the unlikely event of someone claiming him off waivers, he'll be back in GR. Same goes for Aubry. Also, none of Turgeon, Hicketts, or Svechnikov are AHL eligible. If I had to guess at the GR roster (barring any UFA additions):
Frk with Hoggan or one of Ferraro/Andersson possible for the last spot (and if one of those three, they probably bump one of the bottom six out of the lineup).
Lashoff - Jensen
Probably a revolving door of Toledo scrubs
What is with "need" to get rid on Quincey. They guy played good last year and is a pretty good guy to be on our third pairing. I think some people have just branded him in a certain light, and it doesn't matter how he plays they will always see him that way.
That, and some people are obsessed with the kids, even though none have yet shown to be a definite upgrade over Smith/Kindl let alone Q or E. Also, he is in the last year of his contract and seems destined to move on after the year.
So, saving about $3.8M in cap space just to re-activate Franzen's $3.9M and sign Cleary to $1.5M with a $1M bonus. Save $3.8M to spend $6.4M on broken players. This off season is beginning to smell like rotten eggs.
There will be NO extra roster space. Not with Holland giving Cleary a contract and Franzen a spot. Say goodbye to some good young kids via waivers.
If Franzen is healthy there's no choice but re-activating him.
If Cleary is signed (which I doubt) it would maybe cost us Andersson or Ferraro. Not "some", and not particularly "good" either. Not saying I'd like it, and it would kind of defeat the purpose of dumping Weiss, but it wouldn't be nearly as bad as you and most of the board would make it out to be.
I really hope so. I am not saying he is bad or not an important part of our future, just needs to make it easier for us to keep our players together and be able to grow together. Sign a 2-3 year at $2.75M each and then if he scores 25-30 in each of those season's, give him a big deal.
When Tatar signed he'd played one season and scored 19g, 39p. Nyquist has played 2 seasons, scoring 28g, 48p and 27g, 54p. He should and almost certainly will get more than Tatar. ~$4.5 range I would guess, around 5 years. I would much rather have that than a 2 yr cheap deal (when we don't need to be cheap) after which he'd be unrestricted.
I think if holland signed anyone people on here would be complaining about it. There's nobody in this UFA class that is worth overpaying for. I would love to have green but he's going to get paid way too much and that kind of overpayment wouldn't be worth throwing a wrench in the development of our prospects. At least one of those guys (ouellette, marchenko, sproul, Jensen) needs to get significant playing time next year
There's maybe not even anyone worth underpaying. Just adds to the logjam and depending on how Datsyuk and Zetterberg go, we could still be a worse team next year.
I'm all for some trades, and if we were to move a few people out it could make room for a UFA or two. But I hope Holland isn't feeling any pressure to sign someone just to appease the fans or upper management.
A 1st and 2 2nd's? That is it? But oh yeah, big name players NEVER get traded. Wasn't that the line from some of you a week or so ago? I think I remember reading that somewhere before........
The only way this makes sense for Boston is if Hamilton told them he wouldn't re-sign with them.
People were disagreeing with your notion that Stamkos, Kopitar, and Seabrook will be traded. It wouldn't even make sense to say that in regards to all "big name players" since (depending on what you consider a big name) trades like that happen practically every year.
And this trade doesn't make sense for Boston no matter what.
Why do people think Strome is so good, yes he's a good PLAY maker, that's like picking Joe Thornton over Toews, now I bet if Larkin played in the O(He was drafted into one of those Canadian leagues) he would've been a 100 point guy I'm sorry but your a stupid gm if you take an amazing play maker over an amazing two way forward, unless you wanna play golf in the Spring like Crosby, to me Toews probably has the highest trade value in the league right now. I hate Chicago but you can't deny it who cares if he isn't point per game, he led a s*** franchise to 3 cups.
Do you want the Stanley cup or do you want money? Strome will bring you money Larkin will bring you a cup, two way forwards(centers) are the most valuable players in the league and on your team when they are elite(Toews, Datsyuk, Kopitar)
So the hawks don't really have 15 defensemen as prospects and the wings have 8? And they aren't much better than ours?
Damn hockeysfuture ... Damn you
Having a bunch of prospects really only means they'll have more washouts and trade throw-ins when they run out of contract slots to sign all those guys.
I don't put much stock in HF ratings. 6.5 seems like their default rating. Could mean a pretty decent player like Marchenko, or someone who will almost certainly never see the NHL like Aubry. The letter grades seem to be C by default, B if the player is just about at the predicted rating already, and D if the player is all but washed out.
Yeah, we lost three defense prospects this year, so our total number is low. But that's no reason to go chasing Chicago's garbage. We already have more guys running out of options than we have room. We need a few guys that are further away than what Chicago will be trying to dump. We'll try to draft a few this year, a few more next year, and so on, and our shortage of D prospects will be taken care of that way. If we're going to trade for D, it needs to be someone better than someone on our current roster.
Besides, Chicago's depth is nothing. Dallas has the real goods.
If Babcock were still here, I would tend to agree, but Blashill seems to like his defenseman to get a little more involved in the play. Their styles are very similar in a lot of ways, but l do believe we will see significant changes in certain areas. A little more free wheeling from the back end, hopefully being one of them...
Don't get me wrong, I don't think we should stray from the defensive game, I just think when we have some of the best two-way forwards in the game, we can afford to have our defemsemen jump up in the play a little more...
Don't let Kip's anti-Babcock bias confuse you. Babs always got good production out of capable defensemen. It's far more likely that Smith just isn't very good than that he (or anyone else) was being held back by Babcock.
Not saying that Blash won't also, just that I wouldn't expect any dramatic improvement.