Sens Feeling Like Winners?

asq2 wrote:For a bottom-feeding team?

Yeah.

It's not like the Islanders should be looking to deal their pick for Antropov because they need scoring.

Dealing pieces for the future in an attempt to make a clearly non-contending team competitive is exactly what has kept the Leafs mediocre for so long.

We're not the Islanders. They are perennial bottom-feeders. They need draft picks to build a roster. We don't. We are not the Leafs. They have been perennial bottom feeders. We aren't.

The future is now for us, not 2 or 3 years away.

Ya, there is no way we finish below Atlanta and NYI, lol, it was NEVER a question.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

asq2 wrote:For a bottom-feeding team?

Yeah.

It's not like the Islanders should be looking to deal their pick for Antropov because they need scoring.

Dealing pieces for the future in an attempt to make a clearly non-contending team competitive is exactly what has kept the Leafs mediocre for so long.

We're not the Islanders. They are perennial bottom-feeders. They need draft picks to build a roster. We don't. We are not the Leafs. They have been perennial bottom feeders. We aren't.

The future is now for us, not 2 or 3 years away.

We have sucked for 100 games. We're not contenders. We have a rookie goaltender, basically two rookie defencemen in Lee and Picard, fringe NHLers like Bell, over the hill vets like Smith, a rookie coach, a $6 million back-checker, next to no secondary scoring, and our best defenceman is a UFA at season's end.

Dan Hamhuis doesn't make us a contender. Anyway, I never said I was against acquiring him. I'd just rather move Antoine Vermette than a potential franchise player.

asq2 wrote:
We have sucked for 100 games. We're not contenders. We have a rookie goaltender, basically two rookie defencemen in Lee and Picard, fringe NHLers like Bell, over the hill vets like Smith, a rookie coach, a $6 million back-checker, next to no secondary scoring, and our best defenceman is a UFA at season's end.

Dan Hamhuis doesn't make us a contender. Anyway, I never said I was against acquiring him. I'd just rather move Antoine Vermette than a potential franchise player.

LOL, that's a tad harsh, but I understand what you're saying. I think with this new system (assuming Clouston isn't just pulling rabbits out of his arse), I can't wait for next year. Try to add one excellent top pairing D, get rid of a very overrated Filip Kuba, maybe purge ourselves of one of the tweeners and then watch as whatever mobile D-man we acquire lights it up like an Xman tree. Look at Brendan Bell under Clouston - same with Lee to a lesser extent. I think if Murray was to get a Tier 1 D-man, there'd be some fun fireworks from our back end finally.

I think it's possible that our offense might be good enough. Maybe require some nice tweaking, but it can be done.

I think we can get back to it next year. Not a championship obviously, but I think we can be a lot more fun to watch.

504Heater wrote:

asq2 wrote:
We have sucked for 100 games. We're not contenders. We have a rookie goaltender, basically two rookie defencemen in Lee and Picard, fringe NHLers like Bell, over the hill vets like Smith, a rookie coach, a $6 million back-checker, next to no secondary scoring, and our best defenceman is a UFA at season's end.

Dan Hamhuis doesn't make us a contender. Anyway, I never said I was against acquiring him. I'd just rather move Antoine Vermette than a potential franchise player.

LOL, that's a tad harsh, but I understand what you're saying. I think with this new system (assuming Clouston isn't just pulling rabbits out of his arse), I can't wait for next year. Try to add one excellent top pairing D, get rid of a very overrated Filip Kuba, maybe purge ourselves of one of the tweeners and then watch as whatever mobile D-man we acquire lights it up like an Xman tree. Look at Brendan Bell under Clouston - same with Lee to a lesser extent. I think if Murray was to get a Tier 1 D-man, there'd be some fun fireworks from our back end finally.

I think it's possible that our offense might be good enough. Maybe require some nice tweaking, but it can be done.

I think we can get back to it next year. Not a championship obviously, but I think we can be a lot more fun to watch.

I just feel like a Matt Duchene or player of that ilk is significantly more valuable to us long-term than Dan Hamhuis would be.

That's not because I'm not interested in Hamhuis, though. But I'd much rather trade Vermette than our pick for him.

It's very harsh, and exaggerated, obviously, but it's mostly true.

Let's face it, this hasn't just been an anomaly. We've stunk for over a season now.

asq2 wrote:I just feel like a Matt Duchene or player of that ilk is significantly more valuable to us long-term than Dan Hamhuis would be.

That's not because I'm not interested in Hamhuis, though. But I'd much rather trade Vermette than our pick for him.

It's very harsh, and exaggerated, obviously, but it's mostly true.

Let's face it, this hasn't just been an anomaly. We've stunk for over a season now.

Absolutely. I want that top 8 pick. If we trade it, it would be suicide - especially if it's for Hamhuis. Diddle that noise. No way, if we trade our invaluable pick, it would have to be for a Kaberle, signed at 4.25 million for another 5 years.

Duchene, B.Schenn, Schroeder, MSP - please let us come out of it with one of those guys. Cowen doesn't excite me the way he excites other people and Kane I don't know enough about.

I would trade Vermette for Humhuis, but it's one of those interesting moments in sports. Things are starting to work, the cylinders are starting to get oiled for next year, the coach's system is being used to great effect, Vermette and Kelly are vying for PKer's of the year, everything's settling in. To make a trade now gets maximum value, but if Vermette's gonna produce under Clouston (I understand the irony of saying that every single off-season), then I'd like to see what he can bring next year as well. The only way his value drops off is if he gets injured IMO.

504Heater wrote:

asq2 wrote:I just feel like a Matt Duchene or player of that ilk is significantly more valuable to us long-term than Dan Hamhuis would be.

That's not because I'm not interested in Hamhuis, though. But I'd much rather trade Vermette than our pick for him.

It's very harsh, and exaggerated, obviously, but it's mostly true.

Let's face it, this hasn't just been an anomaly. We've stunk for over a season now.

Absolutely. I want that top 8 pick. If we trade it, it would be suicide - especially if it's for Hamhuis. Diddle that noise. No way, if we trade our invaluable pick, it would have to be for a Kaberle, signed at 4.25 million for another 5 years.

Duchene, B.Schenn, Schroeder, MSP - please let us come out of it with one of those guys. Cowen doesn't excite me the way he excites other people and Kane I don't know enough about.

I would trade Vermette for Humhuis, but it's one of those interesting moments in sports. Things are starting to work, the cylinders are starting to get oiled for next year, the coach's system is being used to great effect, Vermette and Kelly are vying for PKer's of the year, everything's settling in. To make a trade now gets maximum value, but if Vermette's gonna produce under Clouston (I understand the irony of saying that every single off-season), then I'd like to see what he can bring next year as well. The only way his value drops off is if he gets injured IMO.

I wouldn't trade that pick within the division.

As far as Cowen goes, he'd really be a phenomenal pick-up. I'm very confident he'll be a #1 defenceman, assuming he can recover fully from his injury.

Fair enough, asq. I was trying to go a little outside the box, but the only thing I went was number 2... You're right that that pick should be untouchable.

I was always wondering why so many people wanted to trade Vermette. Apart for the big 3 and Volchenkov, he's the next guy on my list of untouchables. I also would trade Vermette before our 1st rounder, but Ive seen too much trade proposals including vermette that it makes me kinda sad for the guy. Or is it just for the sake of making a trade, and he's the only forward that has value?
Correct me if Im wrong, but I think he is our best forward since January? Kills penalties, makes that 2nd unit PP dangerous, best faceoff guy, gives everything every night... There is just no one apart from Alfredsson that gives the same intangibles.

asq2 wrote:
I wouldn't trade that pick within the division.

As far as Cowen goes, he'd really be a phenomenal pick-up. I'm very confident he'll be a #1 defenceman, assuming he can recover fully from his injury.

No, no, you know what I mean. A great, mobile, puck-mover, who can also run a PP who also has 4 years left on a nice contract. Just used Kaberle as an example.

marakh wrote:I was always wondering why so many people wanted to trade Vermette. Apart for the big 3 and Volchenkov, he's the next guy on my list of untouchables. I also would trade Vermette before our 1st rounder, but Ive seen too much trade proposals including vermette that it makes me kinda sad for the guy. Or is it just for the sake of making a trade, and he's the only forward that has value?
Correct me if Im wrong, but I think he is our best forward since January? Kills penalties, makes that 2nd unit PP dangerous, best faceoff guy, gives everything every night... There is just no one apart from Alfredsson that gives the same intangibles.

There's tons of reasons his name keeps coming up.

#1: He got a pay increase to almost 3 million dollars and is maddeningly inconsistent offensively.

#2: His offensive totals are down significantly.

#3: He doesn't have a NTC or a NMC.

#4: His salary is still low enough to attract teams like flies to Dung.

#5: He'd be the piece that GMs believe have enough 'potential' to warrant them trading you a Kris Russell style player.

There's more too, like you say, his intangibles make him even more valuable. PKer, fast, can score occasionally etc.

It would still have to be one hell of a deal for Murray to trade him I'm sure, but the reality is, there's not too many guys that we have that have his value.

504Heater wrote:

asq2 wrote:I just feel like a Matt Duchene or player of that ilk is significantly more valuable to us long-term than Dan Hamhuis would be.

That's not because I'm not interested in Hamhuis, though. But I'd much rather trade Vermette than our pick for him.

It's very harsh, and exaggerated, obviously, but it's mostly true.

Let's face it, this hasn't just been an anomaly. We've stunk for over a season now.

Absolutely. I want that top 8 pick. If we trade it, it would be suicide - especially if it's for Hamhuis. Diddle that noise. No way, if we trade our invaluable pick, it would have to be for a Kaberle, signed at 4.25 million for another 5 years.

Duchene, B.Schenn, Schroeder, MSP - please let us come out of it with one of those guys. Cowen doesn't excite me the way he excites other people and Kane I don't know enough about.

I would trade Vermette for Humhuis, but it's one of those interesting moments in sports. Things are starting to work, the cylinders are starting to get oiled for next year, the coach's system is being used to great effect, Vermette and Kelly are vying for PKer's of the year, everything's settling in. To make a trade now gets maximum value, but if Vermette's gonna produce under Clouston (I understand the irony of saying that every single off-season), then I'd like to see what he can bring next year as well. The only way his value drops off is if he gets injured IMO.

What's interesting about Vermette is that his turnaround wasn't so much under Clouston, but has been since 2009. In 2009, Vermette actually has 15 pts in 19 games. Compare that to players like Heatley, who has 16 pts in 19 games or Spezza who has 17 pts, and you have a pretty interesting statistic.

Now, one might argue that his value, therefore, has never been higher, but at the same time, if we were to trade him away, we would be trading away our only semblance of secondary scoring. His style of play is definitely a little more of the Clouston style, so I would rather wait till the offseason and judge then. If he can keep up this pace, or something similar, then I say keep him. Granted trading him in at the draft, we would not receive as much as trading him at the deadline.