Carolina Hurricanes @ Ottawa Senators, Tuesday, April 3, 2012, 7:00 PM EST

Hoags wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:
I think so too - even if it's as a 7th D-man, I think they try to sign Carkner.

Well we still need a #6 D-man if he's #7, assuming we're not keeping Gilroy.

Then I ask what was the point of the Lee/Girloy trade?

Hoags wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:
I think so too - even if it's as a 7th D-man, I think they try to sign Carkner.

Well we still need a #6 D-man if he's #7, assuming we're not keeping Gilroy.

That's where Foligno + our 1st comes in I think. Any ideas on what young D-man we could acquire.

shabbs wrote:
Then I ask what was the point of the Lee/Girloy trade?

Lee wasn't in our future plans, we had him on waivers a few times with no takers. They thought Gilroy might be a good replacement (A decent D-man who can skate and move the puck). Doesn't look like it'll work out so we'll have to go elsewhere.

SpezDispenser wrote:
That's where Foligno + our 1st comes in I think. Any ideas on what young D-man we could acquire.

Not really sure why we'd trade Foligno now, 46 points, 5th in team scoring and good physical play. Yeah he's streaky and all ...

Hoags wrote:

shabbs wrote:
Then I ask what was the point of the Lee/Girloy trade?

Lee wasn't in our future plans, we had him on waivers a few times with no takers. They thought Gilroy might be a good replacement (A decent D-man who can skate and move the puck). Doesn't look like it'll work out so we'll have to go elsewhere.

SpezDispenser wrote:
That's where Foligno + our 1st comes in I think. Any ideas on what young D-man we could acquire.

Not really sure why we'd trade Foligno now, 46 points, 5th in team scoring and good physical play. Yeah he's streaky and all ...

I like Foligno a lot actually, really great young leader, but we need to figure out if he's worth keeping as a quasi-top six, or maximize his value now and try to trade him + 1st.

SpezDispenser wrote:

Hoags wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:
I think so too - even if it's as a 7th D-man, I think they try to sign Carkner.

Well we still need a #6 D-man if he's #7, assuming we're not keeping Gilroy.

That's where Foligno + our 1st comes in I think. Any ideas on what young D-man we could acquire.

Bogosian?


I agree in trading Foligno though. This is as high as his trade value will be with us IMO. He can maybe get to 50+ points next season but we've got some depth now that we can cover the spread. He's awfully streaky though and find he dangles more than he should. Wish he could go back to how he was playing when he pissed Crosby off.

SpezDispenser wrote:

Hoags wrote:

shabbs wrote:
Then I ask what was the point of the Lee/Girloy trade?

Lee wasn't in our future plans, we had him on waivers a few times with no takers. They thought Gilroy might be a good replacement (A decent D-man who can skate and move the puck). Doesn't look like it'll work out so we'll have to go elsewhere.

SpezDispenser wrote:
That's where Foligno + our 1st comes in I think. Any ideas on what young D-man we could acquire.

Not really sure why we'd trade Foligno now, 46 points, 5th in team scoring and good physical play. Yeah he's streaky and all ...

I like Foligno a lot actually, really great young leader, but we need to figure out if he's worth keeping as a quasi-top six, or maximize his value now and try to trade him + 1st.

What's needed is for another team to make us realize he's not worth keeping, ie. a nutty offer for young Foligno that Murray just can't pass up. Otherwise, he's a "hold."

Foligno for Trevor Daley :D

SeawaySensFan wrote:

wprager wrote:

Hoags wrote:

shabbs wrote:
And I was simply eluding to the reason he was IN was because Gonch was OUT.



Irrespective of who we played and if we had won or lost...

And I'm just alluding that Gilroy bashing is generally warranted, he's not good at all

The whole team lost last night, Andy let a softie in, we had a goal waved off, Neil was in playoff mode, the refs were in preseason mode.... etc.

Boy, imagine if he had also used irregardless in place of irrespective? One of us may have blown a gasket. Phew! Dodged one, there.

Let me try:

What did you mean by "Dodged one?"

wprager wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

wprager wrote:

Hoags wrote:

shabbs wrote:
And I was simply eluding to the reason he was IN was because Gonch was OUT.



Irrespective of who we played and if we had won or lost...

And I'm just alluding that Gilroy bashing is generally warranted, he's not good at all

The whole team lost last night, Andy let a softie in, we had a goal waved off, Neil was in playoff mode, the refs were in preseason mode.... etc.

Boy, imagine if he had also used irregardless in place of irrespective? One of us may have blown a gasket. Phew! Dodged one, there.

Let me try:

What did you mean by "Dodged one?"

Very crafty, old friend.

shabbs wrote:
Heh. You "pragered" me. Correct spelling != correct grammar.

Maybe I should really start keeping stats. I was actually making fun of myself there (saying how I almost blew a gasket -- you didn't seriously think that I am that riled up over these things, right?) But actual, real corrections (and not the typos that lead to some inadvertently clever/funny stuff) -- I defy anyone here to find a recent one.

Go on. Go now, you've been defied. Go ahead, I'll wait.

wprager wrote:

shabbs wrote:
Heh. You "pragered" me. Correct spelling != correct grammar.

Maybe I should really start keeping stats. I was actually making fun of myself there (saying how I almost blew a gasket -- you didn't seriously think that I am that riled up over these things, right?) But actual, real corrections (and not the typos that lead to some inadvertently clever/funny stuff) -- I defy anyone here to find a recent one.

Go on. Go now, you've been defied. Go ahead, I'll wait.

I picture you curled up in a ball rocking back and forth in the corner of a room when Neely starts posting...

shabbs wrote:

wprager wrote:

shabbs wrote:
Heh. You "pragered" me. Correct spelling != correct grammar.

Maybe I should really start keeping stats. I was actually making fun of myself there (saying how I almost blew a gasket -- you didn't seriously think that I am that riled up over these things, right?) But actual, real corrections (and not the typos that lead to some inadvertently clever/funny stuff) -- I defy anyone here to find a recent one.

Go on. Go now, you've been defied. Go ahead, I'll wait.

I picture you curled up in a ball rocking back and forth in the corner of a room when Neely starts posting...

Spezza seems to be saying "Don't you mean NEELY?!?!"

Michallica wrote:
I agree in trading Foligno though. This is as high as his trade value will be with us IMO. He can maybe get to 50+ points next season but we've got some depth now that we can cover the spread. He's awfully streaky though and find he dangles more than he should. Wish he could go back to how he was playing when he pissed Crosby off.

Who is going to replace his production next year ? As well as the amount of hits he puts out ?

Hoags wrote:

Michallica wrote:
I agree in trading Foligno though. This is as high as his trade value will be with us IMO. He can maybe get to 50+ points next season but we've got some depth now that we can cover the spread. He's awfully streaky though and find he dangles more than he should. Wish he could go back to how he was playing when he pissed Crosby off.

Who is going to replace his production next year ? As well as the amount of hits he puts out ?

The hits are an issue, but the production may not be with the infusion of young talent coming. I could see Silfverberg equalling him in points (maybe more like 30, but close), Zibanejad will be a hitter, Stone can come in and play, Noesen is THE guy that will replace Foligno I think.

Don't forget, I'm not proposing moving Foligno for a pick or anything, I'm proposing a guy like Bogosian (perhaps not him because the Jets won't let him go, but someone young and good).

SpezDispenser wrote:
The hits are an issue, but the production may not be with the infusion of young talent coming. I could see Silfverberg equalling him in points (maybe more like 30, but close), Zibanejad will be a hitter, Stone can come in and play, Noesen is THE guy that will replace Foligno I think.

Don't forget, I'm not proposing moving Foligno for a pick or anything, I'm proposing a guy like Bogosian (perhaps not him because the Jets won't let him go, but someone young and good).

Except for Silf (maybe Zib) none of those players will likely hit such numbers(or even be in the NHL) anytime soon.

We'd be downgrading the team in the short term at least.

Hoags wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:
The hits are an issue, but the production may not be with the infusion of young talent coming. I could see Silfverberg equalling him in points (maybe more like 30, but close), Zibanejad will be a hitter, Stone can come in and play, Noesen is THE guy that will replace Foligno I think.

Don't forget, I'm not proposing moving Foligno for a pick or anything, I'm proposing a guy like Bogosian (perhaps not him because the Jets won't let him go, but someone young and good).

Except for Silf (maybe Zib) none of those players will likely hit such numbers(or even be in the NHL) anytime soon.

We'd be downgrading the team in the short term at least.

We'll see, I see Foligno's production and his style of play as slightly redundant personally, but what makes him special is his leadership and hits.

shabbs wrote:

wprager wrote:

shabbs wrote:
Heh. You "pragered" me. Correct spelling != correct grammar.

Maybe I should really start keeping stats. I was actually making fun of myself there (saying how I almost blew a gasket -- you didn't seriously think that I am that riled up over these things, right?) But actual, real corrections (and not the typos that lead to some inadvertently clever/funny stuff) -- I defy anyone here to find a recent one.

Go on. Go now, you've been defied. Go ahead, I'll wait.

I picture you curled up in a ball rocking back and forth in the corner of a room when Neely starts posting...

Actually NEELY's posts have been fine. He's slipping

SpezDispenser wrote:
We'll see, I see Foligno's production and his style of play as slightly redundant personally, but what makes him special is his leadership and hits.

It's only redundant if someone replaces what he provides, or exceeds it. Right now I don't see anything.

We can't have another soft team or we'll just have a repeat of '07, assuming we make it to the SCF again.