2012/13 Lineup

rooneypoo wrote:

Oglethorpe wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

Oglethorpe wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:Methot > Kuba ? potentially but not so sure
Lundin > Carkner? maybe?
Latendresse > Foligno? Not even close.


We just got worse folks.

Kuba rode Karlsson's play to an 8M payday. He has 2 seasons being a plus player in his entire career. He was +4 a few years ago and +26 last year. The abberation was last year, not all the Dung hockey he played before. Methot will be excellent with Karlsson, check out his numbers on one of the worst teams since expansion.

Lundin vs Carkner - Who cares ? Seriously we are talking 6th or 7th defenceman. When we are a cup contender then we'll split hairs over the 7th D and 13th forward.

Latendresse vs Foligno. My suspicion is that Foligno will get about 3.5M, which is a whole hell of a lot for a 3rd line winger.

I don't know if the Sens will be better or worse next year, but I suspect our GAA will go down quite a bit next year.

There's that ridiculous claim again. Kuba has been a solid Dman in this league for over a decade, putting up 24-40 points every year but for one, and always playing in a top 4, 20+ minute a night role. His last two deals, both 3 years, were in the ballpark of his recent deal -- $3 mil / yr for 3 years ($9 mil), and $3.7 mil / yr for 3 years ($11.1 mil). Kuba was doing fine on his own long before Karlsson ever showed up in the NHL, and he'll continue to do fine. He's not remarkable, but he's pretty steady and you know you can expect from him -- 70 games, 20+ minutes a night, time on the PK and PP, and about 30 points. Stop re-writing history. Kuba got paid, once again, because he's been pretty steady and reliable for over a decade, with his new salary entirely reflective of his previous salaries and of recent inflation.

I think it speaks volumes that the management team that saw him day in and day out let him walk without so much as a wimper. I also think the fact they couldn't find a taker for him at the trade deadline in 2011 shows how highly thought of he is amonst other GMs.

The only whimpering this team is doing at the moment is over money. It's pretty clear now that there was no way we were going to pay ANYONE $4 mil this year, not without the same amount of money or so going out the door the other way -- hence, the Foligno for Methot trade. Methot + Latendresse will make about what Kuba + Foligno made last year. That is not a coincidence. What we potentially gain in improved D from Methot and goalscoring from Latendresse, we lose in the form of offense from the D (which Methot can't provide) and consistency / predictability (which Tenderness's injury history throws into questions, hugely). We made those compromises because we didn't want to pay $6-7 mil to fill those two needs. That's what all this is about.

Again, I don't mind the Foligno for Methot swap, and I like Latendresse as a backup plan / long bomb, low-risk gamble / hail mary. But if those two moves are the only 'big' ones we make, then, yes, I think this team did not really improve -- in fact, it got worse if Latendresse's health comes into question again and he can't plug the hole consistently that he was signed to plug -- and they did so in the name of saving about $2 mil.

NEELY wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

Oglethorpe wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

Oglethorpe wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:Methot > Kuba ? potentially but not so sure
Lundin > Carkner? maybe?
Latendresse > Foligno? Not even close.


We just got worse folks.

Kuba rode Karlsson's play to an 8M payday. He has 2 seasons being a plus player in his entire career. He was +4 a few years ago and +26 last year. The abberation was last year, not all the Dung hockey he played before. Methot will be excellent with Karlsson, check out his numbers on one of the worst teams since expansion.

Lundin vs Carkner - Who cares ? Seriously we are talking 6th or 7th defenceman. When we are a cup contender then we'll split hairs over the 7th D and 13th forward.

Latendresse vs Foligno. My suspicion is that Foligno will get about 3.5M, which is a whole hell of a lot for a 3rd line winger.

I don't know if the Sens will be better or worse next year, but I suspect our GAA will go down quite a bit next year.

There's that ridiculous claim again. Kuba has been a solid Dman in this league for over a decade, putting up 24-40 points every year but for one, and always playing in a top 4, 20+ minute a night role. His last two deals, both 3 years, were in the ballpark of his recent deal -- $3 mil / yr for 3 years ($9 mil), and $3.7 mil / yr for 3 years ($11.1 mil). Kuba was doing fine on his own long before Karlsson ever showed up in the NHL, and he'll continue to do fine. He's not remarkable, but he's pretty steady and you know you can expect from him -- 70 games, 20+ minutes a night, time on the PK and PP, and about 30 points. Stop re-writing history. Kuba got paid, once again, because he's been pretty steady and reliable for over a decade, with his new salary entirely reflective of his previous salaries and of recent inflation.

I think it speaks volumes that the management team that saw him day in and day out let him walk without so much as a wimper. I also think the fact they couldn't find a taker for him at the trade deadline in 2011 shows how highly thought of he is amonst other GMs.

The only whimpering this team is doing at the moment is over money. It's pretty clear now that there was no way we were going to pay ANYONE $4 mil this year, not without the same amount of money or so going out the door the other way -- hence, the Foligno for Methot trade. Methot + Latendresse will make about what Kuba + Foligno made last year. That is not a coincidence. What we potentially gain in improved D from Methot and goalscoring from Latendresse, we lose in the form of offense from the D (which Methot can't provide) and consistency / predictability (which Tenderness's injury history throws into questions, hugely). We made those compromises because we didn't want to pay $6-7 mil to fill those two needs. That's what all this is about.

Again, I don't mind the Foligno for Methot swap, and I like Latendresse as a backup plan / long bomb, low-risk gamble / hail mary. But if those two moves are the only 'big' ones we make, then, yes, I think this team did not really improve -- in fact, it got worse if Latendresse's health comes into question again and he can't plug the hole consistently that he was signed to plug -- and they did so in the name of saving about $2 mil.

So no players will improve on last year? Turris won't get better? Silfverberg won't have an effect? The system they installed won't be improved over the begining of the season last year?

Yah, Latendresse might not work out for w/e reason but to say they will be worse off? I don't buy it. They still have the same core group of players that had very good years. They still have their leaders. Most importantly, they now have a ton of depth in goal.

People forget Auld actually played for the Sens last year and was awful. Give Bishop those games and where are they?

rooneypoo wrote:
Sure, I sure hope some of the guys will improve. Turris is a likely candidate, but I'm not very sanguine about the others -- the 2nd year kids may well experience the dreaded sophomore curse, for instance. All I'm saying is that if Latendresse, Foligno's replacement, goes down long term, tho', we're just last year's team minus Foligno, with a new rookie or two added int.

As for adding guys with 1-9 games' worth of NHL experience, I'm very skeptical about what kind of immediate impact they can have. I'm all for making sure there's a spot or two for them to compete for, and for bumping them up the depth chart when they earn it -- but I don't like having to start the year with one or even two rookies penciled in in the top 6. Let them come in at the bottom, bust their humps, impress, and steal time away from their competitors. Making it so that their only competition for the top 2 lines is Greening and Condra doesn't strike me as providing them with the kind of challenge they need to take the next step.

NEELY wrote:Like I said, the Sens are young and you eventually have to use the players in your organization and see what you have. They draft players to play, not to just be prospects forever. Yah, they might not turn out, that's a possible outcome. If they all don;t work out then yah, the Sens are in deep.

At some point every player in the NHL had 0 games. They stopped making stupid contract offers for over the hill plugs and people seem pissed that they didn't go out and sign some "big name".

There are 2 big names out there, thats it.

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:
Sure, I sure hope some of the guys will improve. Turris is a likely candidate, but I'm not very sanguine about the others -- the 2nd year kids may well experience the dreaded sophomore curse, for instance. All I'm saying is that if Latendresse, Foligno's replacement, goes down long term, tho', we're just last year's team minus Foligno, with a new rookie or two added int.

As for adding guys with 1-9 games' worth of NHL experience, I'm very skeptical about what kind of immediate impact they can have. I'm all for making sure there's a spot or two for them to compete for, and for bumping them up the depth chart when they earn it -- but I don't like having to start the year with one or even two rookies penciled in in the top 6. Let them come in at the bottom, bust their humps, impress, and steal time away from their competitors. Making it so that their only competition for the top 2 lines is Greening and Condra doesn't strike me as providing them with the kind of challenge they need to take the next step.

That's what you're worried about?

Meh, don't. Greening will take Foligno's spot on the third line and Latendresse with take a spot with either Turris or Spezza. It's time to let Silfverberg have a chance. And if he sucks, then Zibanejad. And if he sucks, then Stone. And if he sucks, then Hoffman. There are guys who need to have a chance. If you feel more comfortable, put Silf on line 3 and move Greening back with Spezza, it worked last year.

You talk as if Foligno was an uber talented forward, he's not more talented than Silf or Z-Bad or Stone. They can do it.

NEELY wrote:Which rookie is going to be starting in the top 6?

Right now the top 5 guys are Alfi, Spezza, Michalek, Latendresse, and Turris. If they actually do make a move for another winger which they obviously want to and have to plan for... which rookie starts in the top 6?

Say Latendresse does get injured... that's when a rookie might step in.

rooneypoo wrote:

NEELY wrote:Which rookie is going to be starting in the top 6?

Right now the top 5 guys are Alfi, Spezza, Michalek, Latendresse, and Turris. If they actually do make a move for another winger which they obviously want to and have to plan for... which rookie starts in the top 6?

Say Latendresse does get injured... that's when a rookie might step in.

Like I said, if Latendresse is a hail mary pass and there's a plan to bring in another winger, I am totally fine with our situation. My worry is that we're done, tho', but I sure hope not.

Anyway, look at the top 6 you've listed. Turris -- great potential, but unproven as of yet. Alfie -- may well retire for all we know. Michalek -- always an injury risk. Latendresse -- doubly so an injury risk. We could spend large parts of this year with only 3-4 of those guys in our top 6, and with tweeners and rookies filling the spots the rest of the time.

We've left ourselves no wiggle room, not at the moment, anyway.

NEELY wrote:Smith, Greening, Stone, Silfverbrg isn't capable of putting in 15 goals?