Murray Promises to Shake Things Up

SeawaySensFan wrote:

504Heater wrote:I guarantee he got a nice 'talking to' by Hartsburg about that.

You think he rolled his eyes or giggled or both?

:lol!:

rooneypoo wrote:

Neely4Life wrote:

Ya Boston is in real rough shape now eh....

A franchise guy, There is about 20 guys in the league of the top of my head I would start a franchise with, over Spezza.

What the hell has Spezza shown that would say he is a franchise player? He will NEVER be a captain, has NEVER won anything in the NHL, OHL, or internationally, and there are more than enough questions about his charachter, work ethic, and general level of competitivness.

Spezza is NOT a franchise player.

I would have no problems dealing Spezza in a Thornton esk deal, he is a cancer and his holding the Sens back from actually moving forward.

One word discribes Spezza. Loser.

Just for curiosity's sake: can you name me, say, 5 other players in the league who put up 90+ points per season, who are widely recognized as talented players, and who are in their mid-20s, but who aren't generally considered franchise or potential franchise players? I'm genuinely interested in the answer.

And, no, Mike Ribeiro does *not* fit the bill.

I was wondering the same thing, there has to be someone, but hometown fans usually know their players best so I can't draw a comparable from another team.

Anybody read this?
http://www.ottawasun.com/Sports/Columnists/Garrioch_Bruce/2008/12/18/7787956-sun.html

That doesn't really sound like a pre-Spezz trade...

The Sun suggested Murray was looking at Ohlund and/or Bouwmeester.

I doubt Bouwmeester is in the realm of possibility but I would definitely not be opposed to courting Ohlund in the off-season.

I think he'd be a good mentor for Karlsson.

Zubov, of course, would be even more ideal, but he's probably too close to retirement.

rooneypoo wrote:

Neely4Life wrote:

Ya Boston is in real rough shape now eh....

A franchise guy, There is about 20 guys in the league of the top of my head I would start a franchise with, over Spezza.

What the hell has Spezza shown that would say he is a franchise player? He will NEVER be a captain, has NEVER won anything in the NHL, OHL, or internationally, and there are more than enough questions about his charachter, work ethic, and general level of competitivness.

Spezza is NOT a franchise player.

I would have no problems dealing Spezza in a Thornton esk deal, he is a cancer and his holding the Sens back from actually moving forward.

One word discribes Spezza. Loser.

Just for curiosity's sake: can you name me, say, 5 other players in the league who put up 90+ points per season, who are widely recognized as talented players, and who are in their mid-20s, but who aren't generally considered franchise or potential franchise players? I'm genuinely interested in the answer.

And, no, Mike Ribeiro does *not* fit the bill.

Come on, no one's got an answer for me on this one? 5 players. And if we can't come up with 5 players, what does that say about this argument? That Spezza is a complete anomaly -- the only player in the NHL right now recognized as having franchise-esque or potential-franchise-esque talent but who is by no means a franchise or potential-franchise player? If that's the case, to me, such singling out says more about current (low) opinions of Spezza than of Spezza himself.

Two to three years ago, people would were saying similar kinds of things about Datsyuk and Zetterberg that are being said about Spezza, but the window has since closed on the validity of those statements. I say that not to compare the three players -- so please don't try to twist my words to say that I'm suggesting that -- but to point to the closest parallel I can think of in terms of highly skilled players of whom it was often said "they're missing something" -- usually, the intangibles (leadership, grit, heart, etc.) -- and so not guys you can build around.

5 players. 90 points or more a year on average since the lockout, or over a similar span -- or, failing that, PPG or better players. In their low to mid 20s. Highly talented. But by no means franchise players. Name them.

Neely4Life wrote:
Absolutly nothing, but they are a better team. Im talking about an individual that is a "franchise player" and you are comparing him to an entire team? There is no logic in your comment. Take a page out of my book, sure, but make it make sense.

Ask what has Savard ever won? or what has Chara ever won? Those would be legit. Boston is a better team then they ever were with Thornton and San Jose still has not won a thing with Thornton. (granted that may very well change this year)

Your logic in trying to prove a point is a little scewed.

It's a valid analogy. You say Spezza hasn't won anything, yet there he was scoring 92 points in 76 games, and being a +26 last year. Also, you can see Heatley's PPG go up after getting to play with Spezza. But Spezza hasn't won anything yet. His regular season production does not make him great, while Gomez has two Cup rings and therefore is a better player.

You accuse me of not making sense? I've got two words for you: Puh and leeze.

hemlock wrote:
Hah. I dunno man, I didn't detect much sarcasm in that last paragraph I commented. At least I know you aren't a quack now though lol.

I see what you are saying about depression, and yes, it can happen to anyone. I just don't think it's depression. I think it's a continued lack of accountability for the last few years, including Murray's tenure as coach (see my earlier comment about Murray and the doghouse). It's nice to see Hartberg try to install accountability to this club, if even only baby steps right now (12 minute skate).

You did not detect any sarcasm because there was none. I wasn't trying to hurt anyone, so technically it was just being facetious, not sarcastic.

Not putting a smiley is the net equivalent of a deadpan delivery.

rooneypoo wrote:
Come on, no one's got an answer for me on this one? 5 players. And if we can't come up with 5 players, what does that say about this argument? That Spezza is a complete anomaly -- the only player in the NHL right now recognized as having franchise-esque or potential-franchise-esque talent but who is by no means a franchise or potential-franchise player? If that's the case, to me, such singling out says more about current (low) opinions of Spezza than of Spezza himself.

Two to three years ago, people would were saying similar kinds of things about Datsyuk and Zetterberg that are being said about Spezza, but the window has since closed on the validity of those statements. I say that not to compare the three players -- so please don't try to twist my words to say that I'm suggesting that -- but to point to the closest parallel I can think of in terms of highly skilled players of whom it was often said "they're missing something" -- usually, the intangibles (leadership, grit, heart, etc.) -- and so not guys you can build around.

5 players. 90 points or more a year on average since the lockout, or over a similar span -- or, failing that, PPG or better players. In their low to mid 20s. Highly talented. But by no means franchise players. Name them.

Yep, about three years ago nobody wanted to touch Datsyuk or Zetterberg with a ten foot pole come playoff pool time. I exaggerate a bit, but they certainly did not go in the early rounds at our office pool. Same thing with Alfie -- he was not close to a point-per-game player in the post-season.

Spezza's goofy look at smile don't help the situation. Someone giggles and immediately you think he's not a serious person. As well, practicing his autograph in a highschool math class doesn't exactly endear him to me. But the operative word in the preceding sentence is highschool.

I do see what you guys are saying, but I wasn't watching those games in Detroit. Were Datsyuk and Zetterberg as inconsistent (being generous here) on the defensive side of the puck as Spezza?

The reason I ask is because if they were, it's a closer parallel. When I think of the Thornton and Alfie comparison, they were already playing much better than Spezza defensively before they really had their coming out parties. That is what makes Spezza seem like an anomaly to me. Franchise talent level, but no signs of leadership yet.

beerandsens wrote:I do see what you guys are saying, but I wasn't watching those games in Detroit. Were Datsyuk and Zetterberg as inconsistent (being generous here) on the defensive side of the puck as Spezza?

The reason I ask is because if they were, it's a closer parallel. When I think of the Thornton and Alfie comparison, they were already playing much better than Spezza defensively before they really had their coming out parties. That is what makes Spezza seem like an anomaly to me. Franchise talent level, but no signs of leadership yet.

They had a pretty decent set of defensemen and forwards, and a team defense that was molded by Bowman. Neither Datsyuk nor Zetterberg are as flashy (and I am not using that term strictly as a positive). Let's face it, hate him or love him, nobody is going to deny that Spezza is a bit of a hot dog. That usually doesn't go hand in hand with solid defensive play.

wprager wrote:

Neely4Life wrote:
Absolutly nothing, but they are a better team. Im talking about an individual that is a "franchise player" and you are comparing him to an entire team? There is no logic in your comment. Take a page out of my book, sure, but make it make sense.

Ask what has Savard ever won? or what has Chara ever won? Those would be legit. Boston is a better team then they ever were with Thornton and San Jose still has not won a thing with Thornton. (granted that may very well change this year)

Your logic in trying to prove a point is a little scewed.

It's a valid analogy. You say Spezza hasn't won anything, yet there he was scoring 92 points in 76 games, and being a +26 last year. Also, you can see Heatley's PPG go up after getting to play with Spezza. But Spezza hasn't won anything yet. His regular season production does not make him great, while Gomez has two Cup rings and therefore is a better player.

You accuse me of not making sense? I've got two words for you: Puh and leeze.

See, your problem is you combine about 1000's different conversations into 1. The original question someone asked me was if Gomez was a better player then Spezza, and I gave reasons behind it. Being a number 1 center on a stanley cup winning team, doesnt matter who it is, I will take him over Spezza.

EDIT: And if you want to make a stupid comment like Sakic a year before he retires, no. Within reason. I cant believe I actually have to type this so I avoid stupid comments coming back.

beerandsens wrote:I do see what you guys are saying, but I wasn't watching those games in Detroit. Were Datsyuk and Zetterberg as inconsistent (being generous here) on the defensive side of the puck as Spezza?

The reason I ask is because if they were, it's a closer parallel. When I think of the Thornton and Alfie comparison, they were already playing much better than Spezza defensively before they really had their coming out parties. That is what makes Spezza seem like an anomaly to me. Franchise talent level, but no signs of leadership yet.

I wouldn't say there were as inconsistent as Spezza defensively, but I certainly don't recall anyone talking about them as potential finalists for the Selke anytime before last season. Last year was their first nomination for that award, for both of them.

In any event, as I explicitly said, I'm *not* comparing Spezza to Datsyuk or Zetterberg in any shape or form. I just raise them as the first examples that come to mind of guys with boatloads of talent who were once thought of as missing those essential intangibles that make them winners, and guys to build around.

As to the other point you raise about leadership, I could be wrong, but I don't think anyone was talking about those two as leaders anytime before this year -- if they even do so now. Whatever has made them franchise players -- solid two-way play combined with winning, I guess, strengths I agree Spezza hasn't developed -- I don't think it's the leadership issue you raise.

Neely4Life wrote:

wprager wrote:

Neely4Life wrote:
Absolutly nothing, but they are a better team. Im talking about an individual that is a "franchise player" and you are comparing him to an entire team? There is no logic in your comment. Take a page out of my book, sure, but make it make sense.

Ask what has Savard ever won? or what has Chara ever won? Those would be legit. Boston is a better team then they ever were with Thornton and San Jose still has not won a thing with Thornton. (granted that may very well change this year)

Your logic in trying to prove a point is a little scewed.

It's a valid analogy. You say Spezza hasn't won anything, yet there he was scoring 92 points in 76 games, and being a +26 last year. Also, you can see Heatley's PPG go up after getting to play with Spezza. But Spezza hasn't won anything yet. His regular season production does not make him great, while Gomez has two Cup rings and therefore is a better player.

You accuse me of not making sense? I've got two words for you: Puh and leeze.

See, your problem is you combine about 1000's different conversations into 1. The original question someone asked me was if Gomez was a better player then Spezza, and I gave reasons behind it. Being a number 1 center on a stanley cup winning team, doesnt matter who it is, I will take him over Spezza.

EDIT: And if you want to make a stupid comment like Sakic a year before he retires, no. Within reason. I cant believe I actually have to type this so I avoid stupid comments coming back.

Impressive!

Now you're accusing me of stupidity you've thought up of me doing in the future. I practically don't even have to come here. Surely, if you know what I'm going to say I really don't need to be here, pecking away at that keyboard. Why, I might as well give you my password so that you can just log in and do it for me.