2012/13 Lineup

NEELY wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:Basically, what I see changing here is:

1.Greening off the top line - replaced by Silfverberg. Silf has a ton of skill, so matching Greening's 17 goals shouldn't be a huge issue IMO.

2.Foligno off the 2nd line - replaced by Latendresse. Absolutely no issue there for us - except that Latendresse isn't as physical.

3.Greening replaces Foligno - who tweened between the 3rd and 2nd lines. No problems there either.

So in essence, people are worried about Silfverberg, when they probably shouldn't be.

I'M worried about the offense from the back end - and still Lundin doesn't strike any confidence at all there.

Even then, so what if the difference between Folgino and who ever does take his spot is 5 goal... Ottawa will give up a lot less than that based on a solid defense and way better goaltending.

And when did Foligno become some offensive stud? It's a good possibility he just had his best season production wise he may ever have. Usually happens around 24, 25 too.

You'll get no argument from me. I don't think people yet realize that we added a thumping D-man who can block shots and hit guys. We'll be running around a lot less in our own zone - hopefully anyway.

Lower the GAA - which I believe lowered substantially after the horrific first month of the season anyway, but lower it some more and that's the same as scoring goals. We've subtracted 1 guy from our forwards - and he scored 15 goals or whatever. He can and will be replaced by Latendresse - without question. Now...it's time for a rookie to take the other slot and run with it.

SpezDispenser wrote:So in essence, people are worried about Silfverberg, when they probably shouldn't be.

No, I'm worried about Latendresse and his ability to stay healthy, because if he goes down our left side looks mighty questionable.

There were a lot of IFs last year too.

By all accounts, the Parise/Suter situations are holding up the trade market. Let's wait and see what we have in October before we hit the PANIC button.

tim1_2 wrote:There were a lot of IFs last year too.

By all accounts, the Parise/Suter situations are holding up the trade market. Let's wait and see what we have in October before we hit the PANIC button.

It's holding up everything.

Either way, lets see what the team looks like going into camp. It's a long, long off season.

NEELY wrote:

stempniaksen wrote:

NEELY wrote:

Michallica wrote:wild card is regin....he contributed what 2-3 goals only?

Ideally you hope turris improves along with regin to replace the lost offense from foligno, but that's alot of 'if's along the way.

That's the other one. If Regin plays 65-70 games, he probably scores 15.

Bingo.

If Latendresse. If Regin. If Greening. If Silverberg. If Sone.

That's a lot of "if's" and not a whole lot of proven.

Foligno was the biggest IF of them all.

No he wasn't. He was inconsistent, but he was money in the bank for 15 goals and 35+ points.

SpezDispenser wrote:Basically, what I see changing here is:

1.Greening off the top line - replaced by Silfverberg. Silf has a ton of skill, so matching Greening's 17 goals shouldn't be a huge issue IMO.

2.Foligno off the 2nd line - replaced by Latendresse. Absolutely no issue there for us - except that Latendresse isn't as physical.

3.Greening replaces Foligno - who tweened between the 3rd and 2nd lines. No problems there either.

So in essence, people are worried about Silfverberg, when they probably shouldn't be.

I'M worried about the offense from the back end - and still Lundin doesn't strike any confidence at all there.

No one should be banking on an unproven rooking coming in and scoring 17+ goals. Hope he does, and hope we give him every opportunity to push his way inside the top 6. But if we have to give it to him for lack of options, I don't see how that's good for him, or for the team.

SpezDispenser wrote:

NEELY wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:Basically, what I see changing here is:

1.Greening off the top line - replaced by Silfverberg. Silf has a ton of skill, so matching Greening's 17 goals shouldn't be a huge issue IMO.

2.Foligno off the 2nd line - replaced by Latendresse. Absolutely no issue there for us - except that Latendresse isn't as physical.

3.Greening replaces Foligno - who tweened between the 3rd and 2nd lines. No problems there either.

So in essence, people are worried about Silfverberg, when they probably shouldn't be.

I'M worried about the offense from the back end - and still Lundin doesn't strike any confidence at all there.

Even then, so what if the difference between Folgino and who ever does take his spot is 5 goal... Ottawa will give up a lot less than that based on a solid defense and way better goaltending.

And when did Foligno become some offensive stud? It's a good possibility he just had his best season production wise he may ever have. Usually happens around 24, 25 too.

You'll get no argument from me. I don't think people yet realize that we added a thumping D-man who can block shots and hit guys. We'll be running around a lot less in our own zone - hopefully anyway.

Lower the GAA - which I believe lowered substantially after the horrific first month of the season anyway, but lower it some more and that's the same as scoring goals. We've subtracted 1 guy from our forwards - and he scored 15 goals or whatever. He can and will be replaced by Latendresse - without question. Now...it's time for a rookie to take the other slot and run with it.

Sure, there's a question, given that he couldn't play more that 15 GAMES in the last two years, let alone score 15 goals per year.

tim1_2 wrote:There were a lot of IFs last year too.

By all accounts, the Parise/Suter situations are holding up the trade market. Let's wait and see what we have in October before we hit the PANIC button.

I agree with this sentiment. I like Latendresse as a hail mary pass, just not as a 'one and done.'

rooneypoo wrote:
No one should be banking on an unproven rooking coming in and scoring 17+ goals. Hope he does, and hope we give him every opportunity to push his way inside the top 6. But if we have to give it to him for lack of options, I don't see how that's good for him, or for the team.

Why not? Greening did it and Silfverberg undoubtedly has more offensive skills. And if he can't cut it, you have Zibanejad, Stone and Hoffman all vying for a spot. I want another weapon up front too, but I also know we have to give the top prospects a chance at some point.

I'll be shocked if Silfverberg doesn't have at least 15 goals this coming year. If I had to guess, somewhere between 15-20 and that should be the expectation.

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:
No one should be banking on an unproven rooking coming in and scoring 17+ goals. Hope he does, and hope we give him every opportunity to push his way inside the top 6. But if we have to give it to him for lack of options, I don't see how that's good for him, or for the team.

Why not? Greening did it and Silfverberg undoubtedly has more offensive skills. And if he can't cut it, you have Zibanejad, Stone and Hoffman all vying for a spot. I want another weapon up front too, but I also know we have to give the top prospects a chance at some point.

Seriously, when is the last time we had a 1st year rookie come up and score 20+ goals on the year? Havlat? It's far rarer than you seem to be thinking.

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:
No one should be banking on an unproven rooking coming in and scoring 17+ goals. Hope he does, and hope we give him every opportunity to push his way inside the top 6. But if we have to give it to him for lack of options, I don't see how that's good for him, or for the team.

Why not? Greening did it and Silfverberg undoubtedly has more offensive skills. And if he can't cut it, you have Zibanejad, Stone and Hoffman all vying for a spot. I want another weapon up front too, but I also know we have to give the top prospects a chance at some point.

Seriously, when is the last time we had a 1st year rookie come up and score 20+ goals on the year? Havlat? It's far rarer than you seem to be thinking.

That's because we've never had great forward prospects since Havlat. Adam Henrique did it for NJ last year.

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:
No one should be banking on an unproven rooking coming in and scoring 17+ goals. Hope he does, and hope we give him every opportunity to push his way inside the top 6. But if we have to give it to him for lack of options, I don't see how that's good for him, or for the team.

Why not? Greening did it and Silfverberg undoubtedly has more offensive skills. And if he can't cut it, you have Zibanejad, Stone and Hoffman all vying for a spot. I want another weapon up front too, but I also know we have to give the top prospects a chance at some point.

Seriously, when is the last time we had a 1st year rookie come up and score 20+ goals on the year? Havlat? It's far rarer than you seem to be thinking.

Don't know about 20, but he'll hit 15-17 IMO, he's got great skills. We were also crappy at drafting up until 4 years ago or so, so it's not like we've have an abundance of high skilled players.

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:
No one should be banking on an unproven rooking coming in and scoring 17+ goals. Hope he does, and hope we give him every opportunity to push his way inside the top 6. But if we have to give it to him for lack of options, I don't see how that's good for him, or for the team.

Why not? Greening did it and Silfverberg undoubtedly has more offensive skills. And if he can't cut it, you have Zibanejad, Stone and Hoffman all vying for a spot. I want another weapon up front too, but I also know we have to give the top prospects a chance at some point.

Seriously, when is the last time we had a 1st year rookie come up and score 20+ goals on the year? Havlat? It's far rarer than you seem to be thinking.

I would bet good money he lands anywhere between 15-20, if he gets any more than that it's a bonus. He's the best forward prospect to come along in a long, long time.

Hell I'd chalk up 15 for Zibby too if he makes it. Similar to JVR's rookie campaign.

Point is it's been about a decade since an OTT rookie stepped in and made a substantial difference. 5-6 players do it every year. RNH, Landeskog, Henrique, maybe Adams (BUF) and C. Smith (NSH) -- that's about it terms of rookies who can into the league last year and made a sizable impact on the score sheet, and even those last two are debatable.

Again, it's really, really rare. If it happens, super -- if it doesn't, it shouldn't mean that we have to play a guy inside the top 6 or 9 all year long for lack of real options. What in god's name is wrong with giving the kids competition for their spots so that they earn them, instead of just handing it to them?

Big Ev wrote:Hell I'd chalk up 15 for Zibby too if he makes it. Similar to JVR's rookie campaign.

Yah, don't see #93 making it out of camp this time around. Needs to put up #'s somewhere before he does it in the NHL. He's literally never put up any kind of real outstanding numbers in any league to this point.

rooneypoo wrote:Point is it's been about a decade since an OTT rookie stepped in and made a substantial difference. 5-6 players do it every year. RNH, Landeskog, Henrique, maybe Adams (BUF) and C. Smith (NSH) -- that's about it terms of rookies who can into the league last year and made a sizable impact on the score sheet, and even those last two are debatable.

Again, it's really, really rare. If it happens, super -- if it doesn't, it shouldn't mean that we have to play a guy inside the top 6 or 9 all year long for lack of real options. What in god's name is wrong with giving the kids competition for their spots so that they earn them, instead of just handing it to them?

Nothing wrong with it but when you tie your hands with long term deals that you can't get out of it hurts the organization. Like I have said before sometimes the best move is the one you don't make.