Murray to give vets a break

SensFan71 wrote:Chicago is missing Burish now for 6 months, would they have interest in Kelly? I only say this because I am unaware of Burish's role on the Hawks.

Burish is a key player on their PK... a Kelly acquisition may be in the cards there with his PK skills...

Hmmm....

shabbs wrote:

SensFan71 wrote:Chicago is missing Burish now for 6 months, would they have interest in Kelly? I only say this because I am unaware of Burish's role on the Hawks.

Burish is a key player on their PK... a Kelly acquisition may be in the cards there with his PK skills...

Hmmm....

a commencement of the swirlings, we can throw in Schubert as a bonus if they need a swingman on their D/F corps.

SensFan71 wrote:

shabbs wrote:

SensFan71 wrote:Chicago is missing Burish now for 6 months, would they have interest in Kelly? I only say this because I am unaware of Burish's role on the Hawks.

Burish is a key player on their PK... a Kelly acquisition may be in the cards there with his PK skills...

Hmmm....

a commencement of the swirlings, we can throw in Schubert as a bonus if they need a swingman on their D/F corps.

Meh... with their cap situation... would they even have the room?

Hawks have $1.3M in cap space... Burish is $712,500... so Kelly's salary would put them over even with Burish off the books.

Yeah... no dice.

shabbs wrote:

SensFan71 wrote:

shabbs wrote:

SensFan71 wrote:Chicago is missing Burish now for 6 months, would they have interest in Kelly? I only say this because I am unaware of Burish's role on the Hawks.

Burish is a key player on their PK... a Kelly acquisition may be in the cards there with his PK skills...

Hmmm....

a commencement of the swirlings, we can throw in Schubert as a bonus if they need a swingman on their D/F corps.

Meh... with their cap situation... would they even have the room?

not so good, only 1.3 mil in cap space as per cap geek, we would have to take equal or more salary back, which wouldn't be good for us either, nevermind.

shabbs wrote:Clouston seems to think they'll keep the current roster until after the final preseason game vs Boston and then carry 22-men...

Source: http://www.ottawasun.com/sports/hockey/2009/09/21/11040751.html

"Clouston said the Senators will likely hang onto the 27 players on the roster until after Friday’s final exhibition game against the Boston Bruins. The club has team building activities planned next weekend in Ottawa and wants to carry 22 players."

I like that approach better.

Shabbs, lol, you wanna go back 2 pages before you posted this and see what I said... I forget, lol.

SpezDispenser wrote:Regin's a very good hockey player, I'm not surprised in the least that Murray wants to clear room for him.

Can you find where were talking about who would make the lineup for Bingo? I actually wanna know what I said cuz I forget with everyone else.

PS I'll but a 24 for ANYONE that said Carkner would have a shot to crack this lineup. Any beer they want.

N4L wrote:

shabbs wrote:Clouston seems to think they'll keep the current roster until after the final preseason game vs Boston and then carry 22-men...

Source: http://www.ottawasun.com/sports/hockey/2009/09/21/11040751.html

"Clouston said the Senators will likely hang onto the 27 players on the roster until after Friday’s final exhibition game against the Boston Bruins. The club has team building activities planned next weekend in Ottawa and wants to carry 22 players."

I like that approach better.

Shabbs, lol, you wanna go back 2 pages before you posted this and see what I said... I forget, lol.

HA HA! I'm with ya on the 22-man roster preference.

This only came up because Murray is quoted as saying he wants a 21-man roster and then Clouston says he wants a 22-man roster...

So who knows.

The coach wants a 22 man roster because he needs his players to stay motivated and have that eliment of tougness and grit with Carkner.

Clouston loves Carkner it seems, it's becoming pretty obvious. He is telling Murray what he needs and wants which speaks volumns IMO. Carkner has made this team baring a disasterous game against Boston.

N4L wrote:The coach wants a 22 man roster because he needs his players to stay motivated and have that eliment of tougness and grit with Carkner.

Clouston loves Carkner it seems, it's becoming pretty obvious. He is telling Murray what he needs and wants which speaks volumns IMO. Carkner has made this team baring a disasterous game against Boston.

Did Carkner dress last night?

N4L wrote:The coach wants a 22 man roster because he needs his players to stay motivated and have that eliment of tougness and grit with Carkner.

Clouston loves Carkner it seems, it's becoming pretty obvious. He is telling Murray what he needs and wants which speaks volumns IMO. Carkner has made this team baring a disasterous game against Boston.

I thought Carkner would make it last year as a forward. The book on him then was that he made very few, if any mistakes. He could be a good stable player/occasional enforcer.

shabbs wrote:

N4L wrote:The coach wants a 22 man roster because he needs his players to stay motivated and have that eliment of tougness and grit with Carkner.

Clouston loves Carkner it seems, it's becoming pretty obvious. He is telling Murray what he needs and wants which speaks volumns IMO. Carkner has made this team baring a disasterous game against Boston.

Did Carkner dress last night?

Nope, but was on the trip. Lee is probably a few hours from getting his ticket to Bingo along with Smith though. Lee is not a favorite of anyone in Ottawa, that's FOR SURE. I still dont think you deal him though.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

N4L wrote:The coach wants a 22 man roster because he needs his players to stay motivated and have that eliment of tougness and grit with Carkner.

Clouston loves Carkner it seems, it's becoming pretty obvious. He is telling Murray what he needs and wants which speaks volumns IMO. Carkner has made this team baring a disasterous game against Boston.

I thought Carkner would make it last year as a forward. The book on him then was that he made very few, if any mistakes. He could be a good stable player/occasional enforcer.

If he keeps it simple on the blue line, makes a good first pass out of the zone, he can be a number 6 guy and really be that big body on the PK we need. Obviously a little intimidating back there, but for sure he can be that guy IMO.

Clouston saw these guys in Bingo for almost 2 years and even brought Cranker up once last year as well as a reward for working hard down in Bingo. Clouston knows what he wants and is dictating, not following orders. At the same time Murray is getting the assets that Clouston needs and they just seem to be working well together, top to bottom.

N4L wrote:

shabbs wrote:

N4L wrote:The coach wants a 22 man roster because he needs his players to stay motivated and have that eliment of tougness and grit with Carkner.

Clouston loves Carkner it seems, it's becoming pretty obvious. He is telling Murray what he needs and wants which speaks volumns IMO. Carkner has made this team baring a disasterous game against Boston.

Did Carkner dress last night?

Nope, but was on the trip. Lee is probably a few hours from getting his ticket to Bingo along with Smith though. Lee is not a favorite of anyone in Ottawa, that's FOR SURE. I still dont think you deal him though.

Agreed... you don't need to deal people on a two-way contract that can move up and down freely.

Nope, not at all. I wonder what he will be asking for next year though... if contract talks dont go well, that kid is gone for a package of pucks and sticks.

What do you guys think of Murray? Does he stick his nose in Clouston's area too much or not. From what I watch and read on clouston he seems to be a great coach. Why is this Murray decision to give the vets a break?

cloverleaf wrote:What do you guys think of Murray? Does he stick his nose in Clouston's area too much or not. From what I watch and read on clouston he seems to be a great coach. Why is this Murray decision to give the vets a break?

This is from direct input from Clouston, I'm 99% positive.

SpezDispenser wrote:

cloverleaf wrote:What do you guys think of Murray? Does he stick his nose in Clouston's area too much or not. From what I watch and read on clouston he seems to be a great coach. Why is this Murray decision to give the vets a break?

This is from direct input from Clouston, I'm 99% positive.

A good approach. That way Clouston doesn't have to look like a complete Donkey to his players and he lets his GM feel in control at the same time.