Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Al-Samarraie. Show Al-Samarraie's posts

    Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    So Neely came out and said there won't be any major changes, just tweaks. Sounds familiar. I don't really have a problem with that, I agree that the core of this team is a very capable one. However, I'm trying to decipher if he's saying that he won't move any of our bigger names (Krejci, Thomas etc) to make room for a blockbuster AND that he won't bring in a big name to add to the roster. Or is he saying "I won't move a core player to make room for a big name BUT I might add someone big to the mix if I can do it without subtracting what I have". We all know that they need to be careful as a few players are up for contract renewal next year, so spending your money this summer may come back and bite you. Does this officially kill off all talks of Parise (or maybe it was never on to begin with), and should we just start accepting that what we ended the year with, plus/minus some role players, is what we are sending out in the 2012/2013 season?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    To be honest, I do not see much value in that interview. Its not as if PC or Cam are going to come out and say "we will be trying to unload  TT and Krejci at whatever cost." The smart thing is to say they are not looking to make any major changes right now. So, if nothing happens then people expect that because that is what management told them. However, if they really do want to get rid of someone they have not tipped their hand in negotiation.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Al-Samarraie. Show Al-Samarraie's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    Fair point walters. I guess I was more focused on the part where he indicated there wouldn't be any major changes in the personnel coming in (if that's indeed what he implied). I get that you couldn't come out and make the claim that you're moving players, so not to rock the boat, but didn't know how far to take it. But I get what you're saying.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    Parise talk should have been dead before it started. But I think this should reinforce that they like the team that won the '11 cup and are going to make some minor changes to shore up the bottom two lines. I think a Thomas trade is possible if not probable, DK trade almost out of the question-he's too good with a good cap hit.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from patriotpat99. Show patriotpat99's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    They have a formula. It has been proven to work. Why would they abandon that and sign a big name big money guy. depth and balance is what PC and CN want, and it's what they'll get
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    I've slowly moved over a bit on DK.  He didn't have a good year even though his final numbers matched last year's in points, and he had more goals.  He has always been a guy who shows an extra gear for stretches, but the stretches seemed much shorter this year and if you look at his game logs, he put up a lot of his points in short bursts.  We all remember the terrible start - 1-0-1 in his first eight games.  Then it was 7pts in his next 3 games, but that burst ended and he was back to 2assists over his next eight games.  Then, again, two games back to back with a total of 5 points, then only 3 assists over the next 7 games.  Wildly uneven.  And the real kicker?  In those 5 games where he had 12 points?  3 were against the Leafs (3-5-8 in those games alone) and the other two were vs. the Isles and the Oil. 

    From Dec. 17th to the end of January, though, he was only pointless twice.  He had 22 points in that 18 game stretch.  Then the hot streak ended and he went ice cold - 2-0-2 for 13 games in February.  Finally, he was relatively hot down the stretch with points in 2 of every three games on average and an overall point/game pace.

    So - that's about 43 games where he was a superstar on a 1.3 points/game pace (106 over full season, which would be second only to Malkin).  But over long stretches totalling the other 36 games he played - and to be clear, we're talking at least 5 games in a row in each instance - he was a 0.23 ppg player or a guy who gets about 19 points.  That's a good fourth liner.  Shawn Thornton had 20 last year.

    To top that off, with his new deal, his cap comparables will include: Hossa, Corey Perry, Ryan Getzlaf, Bobby Ryan, Kessel, Jeff Carter, Kesler, Marty St. Louis.  Much as the pressure was on Lucic this year to show that he belonged in the $4M+ club, it's now on Krejci to find the consistency he needs to truly belong in the $5M+ club.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from WalkTheLine. Show WalkTheLine's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    Very nice breakdown on DK Book. Playoffs aside, I thought he looked better in big games vs. say, the Islanders. I wonder if the stats prove taht to be true?

    A little more consistency from him and we are talking top 10 forward in the NHL.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Wheatskins. Show Wheatskins's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    It seems to me that the heavy schedule of last year and this effected Krejci more than any other Bruin, physically; who isn't a big guy to begin with.

    Plus, the fact that he didn't have Horton for the last half of the year limited his time and space and forced him to work harder.

    A long rest this summer will do wonders for David.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?


    no matter what they say anything could happen.
    From what I understand the gm's call each other all the time and propose deals all the time.  

    So it depends  on who might come around and kick the tires and what they have to offer.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    NAS has given us the definition of a self-fulfilling prophesy.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from boborielly224. Show boborielly224's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    The only matter that stuck out the most in this article is the weak power play. Neely seemed he was not to impress with the PP and a major change is expected for an improvement. A new asst. coach could be the first approach someone to specialize in PP's. The second approach will be a certain player to be on the 1st PP.

    Neely was not happy with the overall team performance will be another issue this summer.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from fourrings. Show fourrings's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    In Response to Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?:
    So Neely came out and said there won't be any major changes, just tweaks. Sounds familiar. I don't really have a problem with that, I agree that the core of this team is a very capable one. However, I'm trying to decipher if he's saying that he won't move any of our bigger names (Krejci, Thomas etc) to make room for a blockbuster AND that he won't bring in a big name to add to the roster. Or is he saying "I won't move a core player to make room for a big name BUT I might add someone big to the mix if I can do it without subtracting what I have". We all know that they need to be careful as a few players are up for contract renewal next year, so spending your money this summer may come back and bite you. Does this officially kill off all talks of Parise (or maybe it was never on to begin with), and should we just start accepting that what we ended the year with, plus/minus some role players, is what we are sending out in the 2012/2013 season?
    Posted by Al-Samarraie


    i hope that's just a smoke screen and they do make a few moves.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    I don't take much stock in what G.M's say when it comes to personnel, I mean what is he going to say, yes we are looking to trade one of our big name guys. You never know what will come across the G.M's desk on draft day or at anytime during the summer. I don't expect them to do anything big when it comes ot the forward lines.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    check this out:

    http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/scott_cullen/?id=394977

    NYI GM Garth Snow saying basically the same thing;
     
    "I don't envision any big changes," Snow told Newsday at season's end. "We have one of the top prospect pools in the league and our core is a good, young group. It's about taking the next step with that core we have."

    I would hazard to guess most GM's will also give this line in some form or another. In other words, it means absolutely nothing.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from RickyHussle. Show RickyHussle's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?:
    Parise talk should have been dead before it started. But I think this should reinforce that they like the team that won the '11 cup and are going to make some minor changes to shore up the bottom two lines. I think a Thomas trade is possible if not probable, DK trade almost out of the question-he's too good with a good cap hit.
    Posted by OatesCam


    If you considered trading Krejci for assets, and using the savings to sign Parise, you could make out very well.  I imagine Parise will be about a million more per season.  If you can trade DK for current depth forwards on favorable contracts is another option.  I like Krejci, and I think he will be better next season, however I feel Parise is a more complete player who is stronger and scores more goals.  I don't know if I should but I do worry about injuries.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?:
    Parise talk should have been dead before it started. But I think this should reinforce that they like the team that won the '11 cup and are going to make some minor changes to shore up the bottom two lines. I think a Thomas trade is possible if not probable, DK trade almost out of the question-he's too good with a good cap hit.
    Posted by OatesCam


    $5,000,000 of cap space for 23-39-62, soft play and a total ghost in the playoffs...with 17:00+ ice time and zero powerplay creativity.

    Let's not go too far with his play and his contract being so wonderful.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from biggskye. Show biggskye's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?:
    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing? : $5,000,000 of cap space for 23-39-62, soft play and a total ghost in the playoffs...with 17:00+ ice time and zero powerplay creativity. Let's not go too far with his play and his contract being so wonderful.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    That's 2 less points than Blake Wheeler, managed.
    IMO, Krejci is a complete floater, and they can't get him out of here, fast enough.
    Time for the Seguin era as the #1 Center, to begin.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from PINEwarmer. Show PINEwarmer's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    Krejci is the one "elite" player the Bs have who might attract interest in a trade scenario. Coupling him with McQuaid and a pick might draw Ryan and Sbisa out of Anaheim w/o major salary cap issues. If not Ryan, then maybe Perry. We need a wing that scores goals and we have a surplus of centers. McQuaid is a D-man that would do well in the Western Conference and Sbisa is touted as having offensive potential. The pick would be low (3rd or 4th) just to sweeten the pot. Just a thought.
    This question may seem stupid but, has Parise said he will not re-sign with the Devils? Or is the belief the Devils can't afford him. According to CapGeek, there should be enough cap space for them to re-sign him even at 8M. or did I misread something?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?:
    Krejci is the one "elite" player the Bs have who might attract interest in a trade scenario. Coupling him with McQuaid and a pick might draw Perry and Sbisa out of Anaheim w/o major salary cap issues. If not Ryan, then maybe Perry. We need a wing that scores goals and we have a surplus of centers. McQuaid is a D-man that would do well in the Western Conference and Sbisa is touted as having offensive potential. The pick would be low (3rd or 4th) just to sweeten the pot. Just a thought. This question may seem stupid but, has Parise said he will not re-sign with the Devils? Or is the belief the Devils can't afford him. According to CapGeek, there should be enough cap space for them to re-sign him even at 8M. or did I misread something?
    Posted by PINEwarmer


    Yeah, because a sort-of-elite center often gets traded for LAST YEAR'S MVP.

    Oh, it's getting worse and worse in here.  I might join Shupe for the summer.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    What would be the point of trading Krejci? It would likely be a lateral move. Now if he was the piece of a bigger deal of which the return was decent then maybe but this is the most unlikely scenario.

    Can someone please explain to me in a coherent manner what the rationale for trading Krejci is?
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?:
    What would be the point of trading Krejci? It would likely be a lateral move. Now if he was the piece of a bigger deal of which the return was decent then maybe but this is the most unlikely scenario. Can someone please explain to me in a coherent manner what the rationale for trading Krejci is?
    Posted by jmwalters


    No team needs two first line centers.  Seguin is a first line center.  Krejci takes up too much cap space to be a second line center.


     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?:
    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing? : No team needs two first line centers.  Seguin is a first line center.  Krejci takes up too much cap space to be a second line center.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    So, to be clear, you are suggesting Krecji be traded for more depth on the wings or bottom 6? Is this correct?

    Would you be adverse to the top three centers being Seguin (1), Bergeron (2), and Peverley (3) or are you one of those that think Kelly or some other "defensive specialist" needs to anchor the third line?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?:
    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing? : So, to be clear, you are suggesting Krecji be traded for more depth on the wings or bottom 6? Is this correct? Would you be adverse to the top three centers being Seguin (1), Bergeron (2), and Peverley (3) or are you one of those that think Kelly or some other "defensive specialist" needs to anchor the third line?
    Posted by jmwalters


    I posted this elsewhere:

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : Goal scoring forwards.  The B's didn't lose to the Caps because they couldn't score on the powerplay.  They lost becuase they couldn't score.  Rich Peverley isn't a first line winger in the NHL.  Jordan Caron isn't a first line winger in the NHL.

    The fact that they had so many 20 goal scorers and no 30 goal scorers tells me that they had a lot of guys who can score one out of every four games, but none who can score one out of every two.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from PINEwarmer. Show PINEwarmer's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?:
    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing? : Yeah, because a sort-of-elite center often gets traded for LAST YEAR'S MVP. Oh, it's getting worse and worse in here.  I might join Shupe for the summer.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot
    Edited error in post-meant Krejci, Mcquaid and a pick for Ryan and Sbisa. Not expecting Kelly to re-sign here and slotting Peverley at 3rd line center. Moving Seguin into 1st line center between Lucic and Ryan or Perry  looks good to me. It moves one "elite" asset for another "elite" asset while leaving roster slots to be filled with picks and  3rd line and 4th line UFAs. Sbisa is younger and might benefit from playing in CJ's system. Developing a PMD might be easier than constantly seeking one on the open market. 
    Lucic-Seguin-Perry/Ryan
    Marchand-Bergeron-Caron
    Pouliot-Peverley-Spooner/D. Jones
    Thornton-McDermid-UFA Center @1M
    Chara-Boychuk
    Seidenberg-Sbisa
    Ference-Hamilton
    Krug-Mottau
    Thomas-Rask

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?

    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing?:
    In Response to Re: Does "no major changes" = no major name signing? : Edited error in post-meant Krejci, Mcquaid and a pick for Ryan and Sbisa. Not expecting Kelly to re-sign here and slotting Peverley at 3rd line center. Moving Seguin into 1st line center between Lucic and Ryan or Perry  looks good to me. It moves one "elite" asset for another "elite" asset while leaving roster slots to be filled with picks and  3rd line and 4th line UFAs. Sbisa is younger and might benefit from playing in CJ's system. Developing a PMD might be easier than constantly seeking one on the open market.  Lucic-Seguin-Perry/Ryan Marchand-Bergeron-Caron Pouliot-Peverley-Spooner/D. Jones Thornton-McDermid-UFA Center @1M Chara-Boychuk Seidenberg-Sbisa Ference-Hamilton Krug-Mottau Thomas-Rask
    Posted by PINEwarmer


    B's management comes out and directly says that they're not making any major changes, and you want the team to trade the #1 center, a defenseman and a draft pick for last year's MVP and a defeseman.

    Why would Anaheim want a $5M center when they have Getzlaf at #1?  Why would they want to trade a young former first round draft pick for McQuaid?  Why would Anaheim want to trade last year's MVP?

    None of this makes any sense.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share