2011 NHL Draft Lottery - Tue. April 12th - 8:00pm EST

stempniaksen wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

shabbs wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

shabbs wrote:You know Burke is gonna try and make a move up to get Strome.

Why do you say that?

Strome's a Burke-type player... physical, gets dirty... I think he'd view Couturier as "too soft" for his likes...

Is he?

Not really, no.

Maybe 'ol Shabbers is referring to Landeskog? Or is pulling an SSF?

I think so, because Strome is as physical as Spezza

stempniaksen wrote:

hemlock wrote:

garblar wrote:

hemlock wrote:2) actually make a losing season worth it by not winning a bunch of useless games at the end so as to give the mostly loser, fairweather fanbase a twinkle of false hope for next year.

you honestly think that a team is going to lose games on purpose?

You're kidding me right? Did you watch any games in the last month involving the Avalanche or Panthers. There was a time, even after the Anderson deal, when we thought it wasn't even a possibility that the Panthers (and probably not the Avalanche) would "catch" us in the standings.

And yes, I think they should have done more to secure a higher pick, particularly in the last week(s) when it looked inevitable that we'd get "passed" in the standings. I'm not saying don't try, I am saying don't ice a lineup that's going to scratch and claw for every useless (harmful in fact) point. There's a distinct difference between icing a lesser lineup and actively trying to lose.

Our center depth was Spezza/Smith/Winchester. We were absolutely brutal on paper and that wasn't the issue.

I'm trying to connect this comment to what I said. Help me out please.

Murray hasn't picked anybody "fresh out of junior". Hartsburg had NHL coaching experience prior to coaching the Sens.

I think he's saying by playing Spezza-Smith-Winchester down the middle we were as weak as we could possibly be.

Anderson as a backup a couple more games could have helped. Sending Greening back sooner

jawal wrote:Did anyone else comment on Craig Button's mock draft that went as follows:

Edm - RNH
Col - Huberdeau
FLA - Landeskog
NJ - Ryan Murphy
NYI - Strome
Sens - Larsson
Atl - Couturier

I don't expect this to happened but the unexpected does happen on draft day.

Larsson? Murray better go unlisted if that's the case, cause I'll go Jackie Moon on his Donkey.

hemlock wrote:

garblar wrote:

hemlock wrote:2) actually make a losing season worth it by not winning a bunch of useless games at the end so as to give the mostly loser, fairweather fanbase a twinkle of false hope for next year.

you honestly think that a team is going to lose games on purpose?

You're kidding me right? Did you watch any games in the last month involving the Avalanche or Panthers. There was a time, even after the Anderson deal, when we thought it wasn't even a possibility that the Panthers (and probably not the Avalanche) would "catch" us in the standings.

And yes, I think they should have done more to secure a higher pick, particularly in the last week(s) when it looked inevitable that we'd get "passed" in the standings. I'm not saying don't try, I am saying don't ice a lineup that's going to scratch and claw for every useless (harmful in fact) point. There's a distinct difference between icing a lesser lineup and actively trying to lose.

The Panthers roster is brutal. I don't think they tanked on purpose haha. The reason they fell is because Vokoun got hurt, sigh. I don't think the Avs tanked on purpose either, something went horribly wrong there this year. They would have still lost with Anderson in next because he was brutal for them this year.

Just calm down a little lol.

hemlock wrote:

jawal wrote:Did anyone else comment on Craig Button's mock draft that went as follows:

Edm - RNH
Col - Huberdeau
FLA - Landeskog
NJ - Ryan Murphy
NYI - Strome
Sens - Larsson
Atl - Couturier

I don't expect this to happened but the unexpected does happen on draft day.

Larsson? Murray better go unlisted if that's the case, cause I'll go Jackie Moon on his Donkey.

You honestly don't have a clue if you think Larsson would be a bad pick at #6 No offense, but that would be the steal of the draft and I don't care what we "need". You draft BPA.

Adam Larsson would become our best defensive prospect

Hahaha Larsson at 6. Can you imagine?

wprager wrote:I think he's saying by playing Spezza-Smith-Winchester down the middle we were as weak as we could possibly be.

Anderson as a backup a couple more games could have helped. Sending Greening back sooner

And Condra, abd Butler. Point is, there are little subtle things that could have been done. Hell it didn't have to be subtle, look at Colorado. They sent away their previous years MVP for a guy who couldn't stop a puck. That's a clear signal right there that they'd thrown in the towel. After that point they traded arguably their best remaining asset in Stewart, and got a potential stud defenceman (he played well in Colorado once he got there) AND a top 11 pick. That's in addition to assing us out of our rightful spot behind the Oilers in the draft. THAT'S HOW IT'S DONE. Murray/Melnyk's half Donkey rebuild by comparison looked like nothing more than an attempt to appease the loser fanbase who is easily the worst in Canada. And that's saying something, because I live in Calgary and the people here not only invented fairweather fandom, but starred in the movie too.

They only got the Top 11 pick because St. Louis started winning some games.

I think you're really grasping at straws. Who would have expected the team to be over .500 with a top line of Colin Greening-Jason Spezza - Bobby Butler?!?!?!?!? Our D included Andre Benoit and Derek Smith at one point! Are team was Dung on paper, what are they supposed to do? Everyone else took the team lightly so we started winning. Anderson was bad on some nights too, he wasn't superhuman every night.

I live in Calgary and the people here not only invented fairweather fandom, but starred in the movie too.

You're just chock full o' quotes, aren't you.

Big Ev wrote:

hemlock wrote:

jawal wrote:Did anyone else comment on Craig Button's mock draft that went as follows:

Edm - RNH
Col - Huberdeau
FLA - Landeskog
NJ - Ryan Murphy
NYI - Strome
Sens - Larsson
Atl - Couturier

I don't expect this to happened but the unexpected does happen on draft day.

Larsson? Murray better go unlisted if that's the case, cause I'll go Jackie Moon on his Donkey.

You honestly don't have a clue if you think Larsson would be a bad pick at #6 No offense, but that would be the steal of the draft and I don't care what we "need". You draft BPA.

Stfu. Obviously I am being sarcastic. Larsson at 6 is a no brainer, but it won't happen. The point I was making (and the one that clearly sailed over your head) is that a defenseman is the wrong move. IF he's there at 6, I would bet that plenty of teams would be interested and Murray might be better off trading the pick (the rights to Larsson) for something else.

New Jersey started winning too and they gained a whole lot of respect from the hockey world. Kovalchuk saved his season with the second half his team had. Should they be criticized for turning it around? No. They started winning earlier than Ottawa but they actually had a good team on paper. Our team was awful.

hemlock wrote:

Big Ev wrote:

hemlock wrote:

jawal wrote:Did anyone else comment on Craig Button's mock draft that went as follows:

Edm - RNH
Col - Huberdeau
FLA - Landeskog
NJ - Ryan Murphy
NYI - Strome
Sens - Larsson
Atl - Couturier

I don't expect this to happened but the unexpected does happen on draft day.

Larsson? Murray better go unlisted if that's the case, cause I'll go Jackie Moon on his Donkey.

You honestly don't have a clue if you think Larsson would be a bad pick at #6 No offense, but that would be the steal of the draft and I don't care what we "need". You draft BPA.

Stfu. Obviously I am being sarcastic. Larsson at 6 is a no brainer, but it won't happen. The point I was making (and the one that clearly sailed over your head) is that a defenseman is the wrong move. IF he's there at 6, I would bet that plenty of teams would be interested and Murray might be better off trading the pick (the rights to Larsson) for something else.

We have holes everywhere so I don't care if a D like Larsson fell to us. I'll take him over Cowen any day of the week. Cowen and Rundblad aren't guaranteed to become stars and Larsson is a safer bet to become one.

Big Ev wrote:They only got the Top 11 pick because St. Louis started winning some games.

I think you're really grasping at straws. Who would have expected the team to be over .500 with a top line of Colin Greening-Jason Spezza - Bobby Butler?!?!?!?!? Our D included Andre Benoit and Derek Smith at one point! Are team was Dung on paper, what are they supposed to do? Everyone else took the team lightly so we started winning. Anderson was bad on some nights too, he wasn't superhuman every night.

Oh god. Who expected it? How about anyone who followed the team after Anderson arrived. They went on an 11-5 tear or something so obviously this wasn't a surprise that we slipped. In fact, I called this (unfortunately) at the time. I remember suggesting that this very thing was possible and had to be talked off the ledge by cooler heads who explained (at the time), no no, there is NO WAY the Panthers and Isles are passing us. There was still time to keep our position by making moves like sending Greening and Condra down, or even rotating the Bingo guys back and forth, but no, they found a winning formula (relative to what we had) and stuck with it. The result, useless wins that potentially cost us a franchise guy.

Big Ev wrote:They only got the Top 11 pick because St. Louis started winning some games.

I think you're really grasping at straws. Who would have expected the team to be over .500 with a top line of Colin Greening-Jason Spezza - Bobby Butler?!?!?!?!? Our D included Andre Benoit and Derek Smith at one point! Are team was Dung on paper, what are they supposed to do? Everyone else took the team lightly so we started winning. Anderson was bad on some nights too, he wasn't superhuman every night.

A shutdown pairing with A-Train replaced by Lee
Erik Karlsson playing the full 2 minutes in PK situations; Spezza taking over from Alfie as the go-to guy in all situations; Ryan freakin' Shannon playing the point on the PP *and* doing his best Chris Kelly impersonation on the PK.

Big Ev wrote:

hemlock wrote:

Big Ev wrote:

hemlock wrote:

jawal wrote:Did anyone else comment on Craig Button's mock draft that went as follows:

Edm - RNH
Col - Huberdeau
FLA - Landeskog
NJ - Ryan Murphy
NYI - Strome
Sens - Larsson
Atl - Couturier

I don't expect this to happened but the unexpected does happen on draft day.

Larsson? Murray better go unlisted if that's the case, cause I'll go Jackie Moon on his Donkey.

You honestly don't have a clue if you think Larsson would be a bad pick at #6 No offense, but that would be the steal of the draft and I don't care what we "need". You draft BPA.

Stfu. Obviously I am being sarcastic. Larsson at 6 is a no brainer, but it won't happen. The point I was making (and the one that clearly sailed over your head) is that a defenseman is the wrong move. IF he's there at 6, I would bet that plenty of teams would be interested and Murray might be better off trading the pick (the rights to Larsson) for something else.

We have holes everywhere so I don't care if a D like Larsson fell to us. I'll take him over Cowen any day of the week. Cowen and Rundblad aren't guaranteed to become stars and Larsson is a safer bet to become one.

Like I said yesterday, it would be a crime to have so much skill on the back end and nothing to complement it up front. You have to have balance. I wouldn't turn down Larsson at 6 either, but I'd explore my options before strolling up to the podium. BPA or not, many holes or not, he'd be adding to our greatest strength, which isn't ideal.