Trade Deadline BONANZA 2015

Flo The Action wrote:
my preferred attitude would be to keep Cowen. he's the one out of all those that has the highest ceiling IMO and also the one that is best playing that position out of all the options we have.

I'm not so sure any more. I've said before I'd prefer not to move him, but he's likely to also have the highest return. I think the difference between Wiercioch and Cowen is less than the difference between what we would get in exchange, if that makes sense. Now, Wiercioch sure's not rough, and that likely means moving Borowiecki up to the 2nd pairing. So interim Methot-Karlsson, Boro-Ceci, Wier-Gryba. A tough player and an offensive player on each pairing. Chris Nilan would approve (he was talking about that on TSN690 last night).

wprager wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:
my preferred attitude would be to keep Cowen. he's the one out of all those that has the highest ceiling IMO and also the one that is best playing that position out of all the options we have.

I'm not so sure any more.  I've said before I'd prefer not to move him, but he's likely to also have the highest return.  I think the difference between Wiercioch and Cowen is less than the difference between what we would get in exchange, if that makes sense.  Now, Wiercioch sure's not  rough, and that likely means moving Borowiecki up to the 2nd pairing.  So interim Methot-Karlsson,  Boro-Ceci, Wier-Gryba.  A tough player and an offensive player on each pairing.  Chris Nilan would approve (he was talking about that on TSN690 last night).

i wouldn't put too much stock in his evaluations.

the thing i see is that cowen might be suited to play with karlsson a few years from now while methot might be better suited for the second paring by then.  i see a huge difference in what cowen and weir could become. i'm not a fan of trading cowen. i'm gonna go on the record and say it. Not a fan. we will regret it.

wprager wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

NEELY wrote:

Wiercoich, Cowen, Claeson, Borowiecki, Englund, Harpur, they all have 1 things in common. Right now none of them are top 4 NHL d men.  People value potential way too much vs a sure thing.

All true except the part where you left Ceci off your list of non-Top 4-NHL d men.

Ceci is on the right side, and we're set there.  It's the left side where we have issues.

How are we set on the right side when you have Ceci, an AHLer, on the right side in your Top 4?

SeawaySensFan wrote:

wprager wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

NEELY wrote:

Wiercoich, Cowen, Claeson, Borowiecki, Englund, Harpur, they all have 1 things in common. Right now none of them are top 4 NHL d men.  People value potential way too much vs a sure thing.

All true except the part where you left Ceci off your list of non-Top 4-NHL d men.

Ceci is on the right side, and we're set there.  It's the left side where we have issues.

How are we set on the right side when you have Ceci, an AHLer, on the right side in your Top 4?

Oh quiet down you crusty old fart.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

wprager wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

NEELY wrote:

Wiercoich, Cowen, Claeson, Borowiecki, Englund, Harpur, they all have 1 things in common. Right now none of them are top 4 NHL d men.  People value potential way too much vs a sure thing.

All true except the part where you left Ceci off your list of non-Top 4-NHL d men.

Ceci is on the right side, and we're set there.  It's the left side where we have issues.

How are we set on the right side when you have Ceci, an AHLer, on the right side in your Top 4?

If only he were 35 years old, then he'd be a top 4 Dman, no doubt.

rooneypoo wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

wprager wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

NEELY wrote:

Wiercoich, Cowen, Claeson, Borowiecki, Englund, Harpur, they all have 1 things in common. Right now none of them are top 4 NHL d men.  People value potential way too much vs a sure thing.

All true except the part where you left Ceci off your list of non-Top 4-NHL d men.

Ceci is on the right side, and we're set there.  It's the left side where we have issues.

How are we set on the right side when you have Ceci, an AHLer, on the right side in your Top 4?

If only he were 35 years old, then he'd be a top 4 Dman, no doubt.

Oh quiet down you crusty old fart.

Flo The Action wrote:

wprager wrote:

I'm not so sure any more.  I've said before I'd prefer not to move him, but he's likely to also have the highest return.  I think the difference between Wiercioch and Cowen is less than the difference between what we would get in exchange, if that makes sense.  Now, Wiercioch sure's not  rough, and that likely means moving Borowiecki up to the 2nd pairing.  So interim Methot-Karlsson,  Boro-Ceci, Wier-Gryba.  A tough player and an offensive player on each pairing.  Chris Nilan would approve (he was talking about that on TSN690 last night).

i wouldn't put too much stock in his evaluations.

the thing i see is that cowen might be suited to play with karlsson a few years from now while methot might be better suited for the second paring by then.  i see a huge difference in what cowen and weir could become. i'm not a fan of trading cowen. i'm gonna go on the record and say it. Not a fan. we will regret it.

I dare you to say that to his face.

I agree. Don't trade Cowen. With Wiercioch you know what you're going to get. With Cowen we're not quite sure but he's younger with a much higher ceiling.

wprager wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:

wprager wrote:

I'm not so sure any more.  I've said before I'd prefer not to move him, but he's likely to also have the highest return.  I think the difference between Wiercioch and Cowen is less than the difference between what we would get in exchange, if that makes sense.  Now, Wiercioch sure's not  rough, and that likely means moving Borowiecki up to the 2nd pairing.  So interim Methot-Karlsson,  Boro-Ceci, Wier-Gryba.  A tough player and an offensive player on each pairing.  Chris Nilan would approve (he was talking about that on TSN690 last night).

i wouldn't put too much stock in his evaluations.

the thing i see is that cowen might be suited to play with karlsson a few years from now while methot might be better suited for the second paring by then.  i see a huge difference in what cowen and weir could become. i'm not a fan of trading cowen. i'm gonna go on the record and say it. Not a fan. we will regret it.

I dare you to say that to his face.

luckily i don't have to. but clearly the guy isn't exactly a guy you''d want making hockey decisions for your team. he's more like the class clown, sitting at the back, making people laugh...

rooneypoo wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

wprager wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

NEELY wrote:

Wiercoich, Cowen, Claeson, Borowiecki, Englund, Harpur, they all have 1 things in common. Right now none of them are top 4 NHL d men.  People value potential way too much vs a sure thing.

All true except the part where you left Ceci off your list of non-Top 4-NHL d men.

Ceci is on the right side, and we're set there.  It's the left side where we have issues.

How are we set on the right side when you have Ceci, an AHLer, on the right side in your Top 4?

If only he were 35 years old, then he'd be a top 4 Dman, no doubt.

No, but with patience, developing in the AHL where he belongs, we can patiently wait for that day to come. Patience, friend. Patience.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

wprager wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

NEELY wrote:

Wiercoich, Cowen, Claeson, Borowiecki, Englund, Harpur, they all have 1 things in common. Right now none of them are top 4 NHL d men.  People value potential way too much vs a sure thing.

All true except the part where you left Ceci off your list of non-Top 4-NHL d men.

Ceci is on the right side, and we're set there.  It's the left side where we have issues.

How are we set on the right side when you have Ceci, an AHLer, on the right side in your Top 4?

Ceci is playing like a pretty good 2nd pairing guy.

Ottawa is -1 in goal differential, San Jose is -4. Pretty close. More importantly, they are very close in ES goals for (112 vs. 113). Judging by TOI per game their second pairing guys would be Braun and Dillon -- they are +3/-12, respectively. Ceci is -6, Cowen is -13.

Braun has 20 points, Ceci has 17 (Dillon has 9).

So, comparable team in ES goals and differential, and he'd fit right in on that 2nd pairing.

Crusty farts? Ewww!

wprager wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

wprager wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

NEELY wrote:

Wiercoich, Cowen, Claeson, Borowiecki, Englund, Harpur, they all have 1 things in common. Right now none of them are top 4 NHL d men.  People value potential way too much vs a sure thing.

All true except the part where you left Ceci off your list of non-Top 4-NHL d men.

Ceci is on the right side, and we're set there.  It's the left side where we have issues.

How are we set on the right side when you have Ceci, an AHLer, on the right side in your Top 4?

Ceci is playing like a pretty good 2nd pairing guy.

Ottawa is -1 in goal differential, San Jose is -4.  Pretty close.  More importantly, they are very close in ES goals for (112 vs. 113).  Judging by TOI per game their second pairing guys would be Braun and Dillon -- they are +3/-12, respectively.  Ceci is -6, Cowen is -13.  

Braun has 20 points, Ceci has 17 (Dillon has 9).

So, comparable team in ES goals and differential, and he'd fit right in on that 2nd pairing.  

I think Ceci could have been a pretty good 1st pairing guy playing on our 2nd pairing if patience was exercised and he had spent the current and previous season in the AHL.

Karlsson is the top-pairing rightie. Ceci had no chance of playing top-pairing except (perhaps) on power plays.

Not enough patience I suppose.

But plenty of patients.

wprager wrote:Karlsson is the top-pairing rightie.  Ceci had no chance of playing top-pairing except (perhaps) on power plays.

Hence the part where I said Ceci would be playing on the 2nd pairing.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

wprager wrote:Karlsson is the top-pairing rightie.  Ceci had no chance of playing top-pairing except (perhaps) on power plays.

Hence the part where I said Ceci would be playing on the 2nd pairing.

You'll have to excuse Walter. He's old.