2017 Sens Off-Season

really don't care if they do nothing, this class is very weak. But I bet we sign a dman. Everyone is saying we will.

Ev wrote:really don't care if they do nothing, this class is very weak. But I bet we sign a dman. Everyone is saying hoping we will.

Fixed

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:really don't care if they do nothing, this class is very weak. But I bet we sign a dman. Everyone is saying hoping we will.

Fixed

No, I mean legit insiders have said they are targeting d-men. They will sign one if they can.

Ev wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:really don't care if they do nothing, this class is very weak. But I bet we sign a dman. Everyone is saying hoping we will.

Fixed

No, I mean legit insiders have said they are targeting d-men. They will sign one if they can.

The only thing I heard from insiders is that "they should" be targeting one. Maybe I missed something. I hope I am. Heck, hey have money with methot gone.

Stone signs with Calgary. Sorry PTFlea....

I knew he wanted to stay there, he has young twins and didn't want to leave.

I think the signing of a D-man may have been high on their priority list wen they were still shopping Phaneuf and Ceci. D-depth was our strength and we lost one. Admittedly it was a top-four but, because Erik can make anyone look good, I think a combination of Claesson and others (Phaneuf/Boro/Chabot/Harpur) will be doable for the so-called top pairing (it's Erik and a cast of many). After that the rest of the D-lineup is unchanged, and are adding (potentially) Chabot, Harpur, Englund, Jaros. No-more need to have Jokipaaka as your 7th or Kostka as a call-up. Hearing lots of good things about Jaros.

Oh, and, by the way, Jaros shoots right.

Brennan thinks we'll be getting two forwards. While I think he was kinda just stirring the pot (to say the opposite of what others were saying) he has a point, and it's something I said earlier. We are losing Kelly, Neil, Wingels, Stalberg from the lineup. We are gaining White. We also won't have Brassard at the start. Logic dictates we need some forward depth and I don't think there's much help from Belleville.

White replaces Kelly. McCormick replaces Neil.

Hoffman-Turris-Stone
MacArthur-Brassard-Ryan
Dzingel-Pageau-Burrows
Pyatt-White-McCormick

That's a better forward lineup than last season. And if MacArthur gets back to game shape, Ryan continues his strong play from the playoffs, Dzingel doesn't slow down in the second half -- then that's a *much* better lineup.

On the other hand, if CMac gets injured, Ryan regresses, Dzingel has a sophomore slump and Brassard misses more than a couple weeks ...

wprager wrote:I think the signing of a D-man may have been high on their priority list wen they were still shopping Phaneuf and Ceci.  D-depth was our strength and we lost one.  Admittedly it was a top-four but, because Erik can make anyone look good, I think a combination of Claesson and others (Phaneuf/Boro/Chabot/Harpur) will be doable for the so-called top pairing (it's Erik and a cast of many). After that the rest of the D-lineup is unchanged, and are adding (potentially) Chabot, Harpur, Englund, Jaros.  No-more need to have Jokipaaka as your 7th or Kostka as a call-up.  Hearing lots of good things about Jaros.

Oh, and, by the way, Jaros shoots right.

Brennan thinks we'll be getting two forwards.  While I think he was kinda just stirring the pot (to say the opposite of what others were saying) he has a point, and it's something I said earlier.  We are losing Kelly, Neil, Wingels, Stalberg from the lineup.  We are gaining White.  We also won't have Brassard at the start.  Logic dictates we need some forward depth and I don't think there's much help from Belleville.  

White replaces Kelly.  McCormick replaces Neil.  

Hoffman-Turris-Stone
MacArthur-Brassard-Ryan
Dzingel-Pageau-Burrows
Pyatt-White-McCormick

That's a better forward lineup than last season.  And if MacArthur gets back to game shape, Ryan continues his strong play from the playoffs, Dzingel doesn't slow down in the second half  -- then that's a *much* better lineup.

On the other hand, if CMac gets injured, Ryan regresses, Dzingel has a sophomore slump and Brassard misses more than a couple weeks ...

You forgot Smith.

There's not too much you can do really, aside from replacing McCormick with someone with possible 3rd line capabilities. Burrows is okay, but nothing special. How many points can you count on an aging forward like that for? I'd really like him to start on the 4th line with Pyatt, which leaves a really big hole on the third line. Hopefully we sign someone for that spot, perhaps a guy with 2nd line potential so we can interchange the lineup.

I'd like Justin Williams. I think he's a perfect addition if we're not landing anything bigger. Righty, can play with Pageau and we can finally have a somewhat complete top to bottom roster.

Yost is reporting (sorry) that Stalberg is apparently resigning with the Sens.

I forgot Smith LOL! He was in our top-six most of last season. That's hilarious. Miracle that we got to the ECF. All Hail The System.

I just figured White replaces Kelly (as 4LC) and McCormick replaces Neil (as 4LRW).

Hoffman/MacArthur are the 1LW/2LW. Then Smith/Dzingel/Burrows/Pyatt/Stalberg (if Yost is right) are all lefties. It makes absolutely no sense to re-sign Stalberg. Pyatt does what he does for less.

Looking at points/60 Hoffman was 2.81 and Burrows was next at 2.39. CMac was 2.37 in his last full season. So maybe it's not quite so clear who the 2LW is. But there's no denying we have too many bottom-six LW.

So Smith/Dzingel/Pyatt split the bottom-six LW ice time. Stalberg (I hope Yost is wrong) is also a leftie. As is Burrows (but I thought he played RW).

tim1_2 wrote:Yost is reporting (sorry) that Stalberg is apparently resigning with the Sens.

That'd be great

I hope the sens sign markov for 2 years at 6 mil each. Perfect for Ottawa

More and more I think Markov is perfect.

Nate Thompson to Ottawa?

Why would you want Stalberg? What does he do that Pyatt doesn't do for less? Better points/60 (nearly identical G/60), way fewer PIM/60 (and neither one is a fighter so fewer PIMs is better), better +/-. Both can skate -- I don't think Stalberg is significantly faster, if at all. Stalberg is bigger but it's not like either one of them is a big hitter.

As for Markov, he wants 2 years. He is 38. I'd pass. Look at Streit in Pittsburgh.

wprager wrote:Why would you want Stalberg? What does he do that Pyatt doesn't do for less?  Better points/60 (nearly identical G/60), way fewer PIM/60 (and neither one is a fighter so fewer PIMs is better), better +/-.  Both can skate -- I don't think Stalberg is significantly faster, if at all.  Stalberg is bigger but it's not like either one of them is a big hitter.

As for Markov, he wants 2 years.  He is 38.  I'd pass.  Look at Streit in Pittsburgh.

I like Stalberg's size and speed and ability to move up and down the lineup. Better than Nate friggin Thompson.

I take that back, Anaheim fans have nothing but glowing things to say about Thompson. They say we'll end up loving him from shift one.

OK then

We used to say that about Neil. Crowd favorite. 1 goal, 1 assist in 30 regular season games. How's Curtis, anyway?