Ottawa Senators Mid-Term Report Card: 2011-12
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 6, 2012 7:00 AM EST
in Opinion
Email
Print
With their 4-1 win over the Tampa Bay Lightning last night, the Ottawa Senators have arrived at the half-way point of the 2011-12 season. Virtually no one predicted the team would be as successful as they have been: A 21-15-5 record has Ottawa sitting in fifth place in the Eastern Conference (although they've played more games than just about any other team in the East), with a high-powered offence often covering up for defensive gaffes and sometimes-poor goaltending.
With the first half of the season in the books, it makes sense to take a look at the individual performances of the players on the Senators, and look at who's been good, who needs to improve, and who we're likely to see the best second-half from. After the jump, check out our 2011-12 Mid-Term Report Card for the Ottawa Senators.
Grades for each player is based on a compilation of factors. Most important is the player's performance to date as compared to how he was expected to do, but also factoring in are that player compared to similar players in the same role on other teams and the player's importance to team success.
Alfie's defying his age with his play this season, and that reality has been a huge reason for Ottawa's emergence as a two-line team for the first time in a long time. His health has mostly held out so far, and in 35GP he's already scored 31P (13G, 18A)--equaling his point total from last season, but last year it took him 54GP to do so. He's headed to the All-Star Game once again, and is a lock to be a team captain, and definitely deserves the honour.
Anderson's season started quite poorly, and he's periodically put in some stinkers since then--games against Pittsburgh in November and Montreal in December spring to mind--but in general, his numbers are improving steadily. Still, with a save percentage barely at 90 and a goals-against average over three, he's got a ways to go to meet the lofty expectations of him based on his play last season. But things are looking up: He won the Molson Cup in December, and his game on Thursday clawed his goals-against average above 90% for the first time this season.
He was brought in to give Anderson a bit of support in the crease, but Auld is having his worst season statistically as a professional goaltender and hasn't helped this team at all so far. His save percentage is just 87.5, and his goals-against average is closer to four than it is to three--basically, it's terrible. Auld didn't even win a game until December 16, and even in that game he allowed four goals. If there's one positive, though, it's that Auld has never been this bad--which leads me to believe his second half will be markedly improved.
After a great second half and Calder Cup run, Butler was expected to join the Senators as a top-line player and provide reasonably consistent offensive production playing alongside Jason Spezza. Those expectations were probably too much, but the fact remains that Butler has been surpassed on the depth chart by just about every other player on the NHL roster, and even some guys who were slotted for an AHL roster spot (including Kaspars Daugavins). I don't think it's too much to say that the biggest factor in Butler's continued spot on the NHL roster is his one-way contract. The reasons he's receiving a passing grade are twofold: First, he's taken the demotion in stride, and honestly appears to be working hard to do what Paul MacLean is asking of him; and second, his play has been slightly better lately.
Carkner hasn't had much of an opportunity this season, but he's playing about as well as was expected so far. He's only taken one minor penalty this season, proving he can play solid, physically imposing defence without putting the team short-handed. His Corsi rating isn't great, but he's quickly compiling blocked shots and hits you expect from a bottom-pairing defenceman. He's not yet trusted with much short-handed is time per game, but as he gets into mid-season shape (he was very late to start the season, after all), I expect that responsibility to increase.
AnaCondra started the season on the third line, mostly as a role player with a huge role on the penalty kill. Recently, though, he's caught the favour of MacLean with his play and was bumped up to the second line with Alfredsson and Kyle Turris--and fits in quite well there. Along with his positive Corsi rating is his team-leading plus-minus rating of +10, and a solid 16P (7G, 9A) in 40GP so far.
Cowen has certainly been one of the most pleasantly surprising players on the Sens' roster this season, not just with his strong defensive play but also his 11P (4G, 7A) so far. His strength is incredible, and seeing him out-muscle much more experience players like a wily veteran is pretty fun to watch. His play was especially remarkable while the team was without Kuba and Sergei Gonchar, but since then his role (and, interestingly, his success) has tailed off to some degree. Still, he's been great for the team so far, and his emergence likely factored into the decision to trade David Rundblad.
Few would have expected Daugavins to play much of the season for the Senators, and he didn't start the season in Ottawa. But when he was recalled, Daugavins forged a place for himself on the roster with some energetic and--more importantly--defensively responsible play on the third and fourth lines, not to mention his role on the penalty kill. He won't blow anyone away with his finesse, but unless something drastic happens you can be pretty certain Daugavins will stick around in Ottawa.
It's been a great season for Foligno, and he's on pace to shatter his career high in goals, assists, and points. His best success seemed to come during his short stint as a centreman, but he's still doing well on the wing. One area for improvement, though, is his work on the powerplay: Despite being a regular on the second powerplay unit and averaging more than a minute per game on the man-up, he only has a single point (a goal) with the man advantage. Ottawa's powerplay efficiency is near the middle of the pack in the league, but it's heavily weighted towards the first unit; if Foligno can make the second unit more potent, the Sens' success would pick up even more.
It's been one heck of a bounce back season for Gonchar, and his improvement has mostly been at even-strength. He's close to matching his point totals from last season in half as many games, and more than half of those points are at even strength. He's playing better defensively, too, and looks a lot more like the guy Bryan Murray expected when he signed him to that three-year, $16.5M contract in 2010.
Greening started the season like a bat out of hell, but slowed down significantly since then--and has been bumped off the first line and well down the lineup in the process. He's still having a good season offensively, but has fallen well out of discussions for the Calder Trophy (which were premature, anyway). He's developing into a great power forward but, as could be expected, ins't there yet.
I don't think much needs to be said about Karlsson, really. He has been the best player on the team all season, and is likely the most important part of the Senators' offensive breakout this season. The offence regularly revolves around the young defender, and he's the go-to guy on the powerplay and in overtime. He's leading all defencemen in the league in scoring, has a ridiculously high Corsi rating on the year, and has been the team's best all-around defenceman. His production has improved steadily in his first two seasons, but season three is a breakout year on his road to becoming among the league's elite offensive defencemen.
Many were unsure of Konopka's place on the team when he was signed in the off-season, but he's come in and become a solid fourth-line faceoff specialist and enforcer. To start the season he seemed to think he'd have to fight nearly every game, but since concentrating more on his play with the gloves on his game has improved. He's scored three goals, which is surprising, and is on pace for a career-high in goals and points. The biggest thing for Konopka, though, is his faceoffs: He doesn't take that many (he's fourth on the team in overall faceoffs taken), but his winning percentage is tops in the league, and he takes plenty of important draws, especially while the team is short-handed.
An odds-on favourite for most improved player from last season, Kuba's been remarkably important to the success of the Senators this season. He's second on the team in TOI/game this year, behind only Karlsson, and is tops among Sens for SH TOI/game. But he's also putting up points, with 3G and 7A so far. He's second on the team in blocked shots and as critical as people are (myself included) about his aversion to hitting, he still keeps his opponents in check effectively. He's certainly improved his value on the trade market, but in the process he's raised plenty of questions about whether or not the Sens should consider trading him at all, considering how important he's been to the team's first-half success.
Lee has had moments of strength this season, but still hasn't shown himself to be a player the Senators need in the lineup on a given night. Despite his size, he still seems to struggle containing players and clearing the front of the net, and his decision-making is often suspect. He still leaves us wanting the same Brian Lee who stepped into the 2008-09 Senators and played some very solid hockey. (Tellingly, Lee played more ice time per game in 2009, as a 21-year-old, than he's playing this season as a 24-year-old.)
This year's been a breakout season for Michalek, too, at least as a goal scorer. With 19G already, he's well on his way to setting a new career high in goals, but Michalek needs to work on his consistency, and will probably have to fight through a lot this season as people continue zeroing in on him as the goal-scorer on his line. Still, his play this season--especially early on--was integral in powering Ottawa to the playoff spot they sit in today.
Neiler's having a strong season this year, whether playing on the team's third or fourth line. His stats are about in line with his career average (although they're one pace to be better than last season, and are already better than 2008-09), but his impact on the outcome of games has perhaps never been greater. Although it's far from a nightly thing, Neil regularly provides a big hit, a dominating shift, or even a strong fight to energize his teammates and push them back into the game.
Big Rig Phillips is having a better season than he did last year, but that was a virtual certainty given how abysmal he was last year. Solid play by all of Gonchar, Kuba, and Karlsson has bumped Phillips down to the second (and sometimes the third) pairing in the lineup, which is pretty well where he fits today. But it's safe to say the Senators can expect more from Phillips: He's fifth among defencemen in TOI/game, and averages less than even rookie Jared Cowen does per game. He plays lots on the penalty kill, though (and has two short-handed assists, notably), and leads the team in blocked shots and is right up there in hits.
I'm not sure what Regin did to earn such bad luck, but he's certainly paying for it. A shoulder injury has likely sidelined him for the rest of the season, leaving him with just 10 games played this season. He played well in those games, but competition for the second-line centre position has only heated up while he's been rehabbing his shoulder injury.
If there's a more surprising success for the Senators this season than Z. Smith, I can't think of him. He's already scored 12G, which is more than most people expected he'd get through the whole season--and we're just at the halfway point. His play on the team's third line has made it a legitimate threat every game, and his contributions on the penalty kill have been very important. He's also really helped fans forget about Mike Fisher by replacing a lot of what the fan favourite used to bring to the team--with a little bit more edginess, to boot. It's hard to predict what Z. Smith's career potential is, but he sure is looking good right now--and this year will be his first full NHL season.
The only player who rivals Karlsson in importance to this team is Spezza. He's on pace to have his best season since 2008, with 41P (15G, 26A) in 41GP. He's got a terrific Corsi rating, has been integral in gaining and retaining pressure in the offensive zone, and it probably playing the best all-around hockey of his career. He does still have some minor blemishes to his game, hence the imperfect grade, but his leadership in taking this team on his back is extremely impressive.
It's been a short semester for Turris so far, but he's slowly re-gaining his confidence, skills, seasoning, and comfort level at the NHL level. He has six points in just eight games with the Sens, and three of those are in the last three games. His presence offers stability on the second line, lets them match up nicely against most team's second lines, and balances the top six forwards on the team. I'm of the opinion that the best is yet to come for Turris, but so far he's done quite well.
Winchester's been almost as unlucky as Peter Regin over the last couple of seasons, although not quite. It's tough to grade him on his shortened semester this first half of the season, but working in his favour is the stability he offers to the fourth line, his penalty-killing abilities, and pretty solid point totals considering his ice time.
89 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Nice Post!
What would you give for the Coach and GM?
I’m thinking the Paulrus gets an “A”, since as great as the bounceback seasons have been for the players, the addition of the coach has changed the whole dynamic of the team for the better. WIthout MacLeans system and confidence in our players, I’m not sure we would have been as resilient late in games as we have been. He’s made the players buy in to the system and they clearly trust his judgement.
I think BMurr would get a “B” so far for the year and here’s why: He has done some positive things for the franchise in hiring Paul Maclean, as well as trading for Kyle Turris to solidify our 2nd line centre spot. However, he also IMO overpaid for Turris, and while it can be argued that it was market value at the time, or that it has worked out in hindsight, I still think it was an overpayment at the time, and that keeps him from an A.
What do you think?
That would have been a good inclusion
I’d probably give MacLean an A+, to be honest, because it’s pretty incredible what he’s done so far in instituting an exciting and fun playing system while quickly earning the trust and respect of the players. It’s tough to overstate the importance of that.
As for Murray, I’m not sure. I’d say probably a B- because we paid a lot to get Turris, although at this point it remains to be seen who will have won the deal. Other than that trade, he hasn’t done much this season; his signing of Auld was unfortunate, but bringing in Konopka turned out to be a good move.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 6, 2012 8:41 AM EST up reply actions
Murray grade
The fact that MacLean gets an A+ has to factor somewhat into Murray’s grade for the season. It may have taken a few tries, but it seems like Murray has finally hired the right coach. To me that bumps him up a grade. I’d probably give him a B+ at this point.
Too early
After half a season most of us were singing Clouston’s praises as well.
by B_T on Jan 6, 2012 3:31 PM EST up reply actions
It has been a short period of time
But the impression that I get for an admittedly limited sample from SensTV interviews and postgame reactions, the team is having fun winning games, rather than simply going out and strictly adhering to a system they didn’t fully understand or believe in. Sergei Gonchar’s statements about being “confused” by Clouston’s system, in contrast to his play this year seem to have been true for the rest of the players, in combination with having a more communicative coach.
It also sure doesn’t hurt that Alfredsson and Spezza have been pretty healthy up until this point in the season, and are playing incredibly good hockey.
I think Peter gave an excellent assessment of the players on the team so far this season!
I think the early returns on the Turris deal have been amazing. If Turris plays at a .75 g/g clip during his time in Ottawa we definitely won that trade, hands down. I’m sure he’ll slow down and hit bumps along the way, but I can’t wait to see what he does now that he has a goal and a multipoint game under his belt.
I suppose everyone was once bitten, twice shy after the Filatov trade, but maybe Turris really did just need a change in scenery to reach his potential.
He's said multiple times that MacLean has had confidence in him and that's what he's been missing.
He’s also mentioned that he knew as soon as he arrived, things would be better. I’m totally good with the trade. I think some of the steals Murray has pulled off have raised our standards for what our draft picks are worth. I don’t think he overpaid anymore, I think it was a fair price.
by Pmoron on Jan 6, 2012 8:06 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
MacLean has done a very minimal amount of coaching. The PP that was surging to the top of the league prior to the Gonchar and Kuba injuries is Dave Cameron’s feather to be capped. The refusal to start with an Alfie-Spez-Michalek combo when he routinely switches to that once we’re down two goals is perplexing. Anderson’s terrible numbers are at least in part due to MacLean’s slow trigger finger on timeouts and goalie switches. He rarely does anything when two quick goals are scored and that has frequently resulted in a third. He doesn’t stand up for his players in the media, which has led to Foligno’s drop off in his team lead in hits. His system is solid and he’s a great coach, just not a head coach. I’d give him a B.
by ojc on Jan 6, 2012 1:34 PM EST up reply actions
How can you say this with such certainty?
It sure looks to me as though MacLean has done a lot of coaching, and a lot of great coaching.
Personally, the biggest change that I see is in his approach to the team, his treatment of the players, and his communication skills. These are things we’ve heard mentioned in the media, and I think they’re a big change from past coaches.
Still, I don’t think B is a bad grade to give him, considering how negative your comments seem to be! I’d grade him higher, but that’s just me.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 6, 2012 1:41 PM EST up reply actions
As my last line said, I think he’s a great coach, just not a good head coach. Obviously the players love him, but sometimes you need to get animated at your players, at the refs, and at the media. That’s the difference between being the leader of your team and a guy who communicates well and pumps you back up after Babcock tears a strip off you for making a bone headed giveaway. The lack of makeup calls in the Sens favour has been particularly alarming this season. More so than in the past, and that’s saying something. Obviously Clouston was a poor communicator and resultantly exacerbated a bad situation by shouting at the refs, but you’d think someone as versed in discourse as MacLean is touted to be would be able to make the refs see reason. The media thing is obviously more of a pet peeve that a fan experiences, but still there’s no reason not to come out and say the hit by Foligno wasn’t a penalty, the hit on Winch should have been more, the hit on Alfredsson should have been 5 games. I guess Murray does that for him, but two voices are louder than one.
by ojc on Jan 6, 2012 1:51 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, disagree about just about everything you're using there...
Lets take the most recent Jack Adams winner, Dan Bylsma, who is a great communicator, just like MacLean. I’ll admit I don’t see a lot of him, but I can’t find any evidence of him tearing a strip off anyone on his team, or the media, or the refs, and his approach seems to work (see his stanley cup win, and work with crosby and malkin out of the lineup).
Furthermore, isn’t there an “unwritten rule” out there that as a first year head coach, you have to pay your dues and build relationships with referees before you lambaste them or scream obscenities at them during a game? One would assume that “standing up” for your players (however eloquently) in game as you’re describing could have the same effect as Clouston yelling at them? The referees wouldn’t skate over to our bench and pull a “who the h*** does this guy think he is?” moment?
“The refusal to start with an Alfie-Spez-Michalek combo when he routinely switches to that once we’re down two goals is perplexing”
That’s actually called having two balanced top 6 lines. Which I think has been validated what with the recent success of Kyle Turris paired with Alfredsson. Spezza has proven that he can score without Alfie on his line, and while Alfie does provide more punch, it also makes it easier to shut down our offense if they only have to key on one “big” line. Does anyone really think that our 2nd line would be anywhere near as effective featuring Greening – Turris – Condra? Turris is young and not nearly good enough yet to carry Greening the way Spezza is.
And lets not even get into the “who didn’t pull who/ take a time out” argument when we have DAVE CAMERON on the bench. (See WJC final circa LAST YEAR)
Paul MacLean = A
Yeah, sorry...
Totally disagree. Paul MacLean has been a terrific coach up until this point of the season, and I expect him to continue to grow and develop along with the team. Time will tell if he’s to be considered a “good” NHL head coach, and I think you’re way too early in passing judgement on his head coaching abilities. I’m not writing off what you’re saying, but saying maybe give it some time :)
If you’re right, then I’ll deservedly eat my words!
I completely agree with you, it is his first season so obviously he doesn’t know everything. My point is more that there are some deficiencies in his coaching that need addressing. He certainly has time to do this, but right now they are still there. I’d give him a B verging on a B+. I think that’s a solid grade for someone who’s putting up good results with some areas to work on, no?
by ojc on Jan 7, 2012 2:58 PM EST up reply actions
Nice synopsis
Very nice synopsis Peter.
All in all, it is quite remarkable that we are where we are in the standings given the often mediocre goaltending and the frequent defensive lapses.
But hey, we are building and we are an exciting team to watch.
I was not a happy camper to see Rundblad go for Turris, and now I agree with you that I believe the best is yet to come for Turris… he could turn into a much-needed solid top six guy for the future.
Good post
I don’t think I’d argue with any of your grades. I was thinking Lee should get a C-, but he’s also been a trooper when told to sit in the press box, and now I think of it he’s not playing that badly, not that I’ve had much opportunity to see him play for myself.
Love the mid-term writeups
and the Coach, A+, easy grade.
GM is too hard to grade. Alot of the Sens success in 2011-2012, is really based on moves initiated last season…….
And the moves this summer/season involving younger players (Rundblad for Turris, trading for, and the treatment of, Filatov, 1-ways for Smith, Butler, Condra, Greening), really need to be looked at after a period of time. Smith looks like a great 3rd line center, and Condra is a great everyman player, but Butler and Greening and Filatov…..they may end up being worth it, they may not).
Konopka is good in his role, Auld is not, so that is a wash. Th Sens are rebuilding, and we can better judge the GM for 2011-2012.
Individual by individual, hard to argue with the grades. Konopka at C+ is fair; I may have graded him slightly higher since, given his role (limited ice time, some toughness, some faceoff ability, and limited special teams play, great locker room and media guy), he is doing everything the Sens would expect of him. Taking misconducts, trying to give retribution for Winchester, a 5 minute phantom boarding versus the Rangers, things like that, folks blamed him for, but I don’t think he was out of line in either case.
The only guy I think you may have overestimated was Butler. Given his contract, what he showed last year, and the lack of showing anything consistently this year, I may have given him an F. He really hasn’t done anything more than Filatov, who was scratched and sent away, relative to the ice time and opportunities he has been given.
Hopefully he turns it around, and Michalek and Foligno gets over their dry spell. We can’t rely on Spezza, Alfredsson, Karlsson and Z. Smith (!) exclusively.
"If you aren't diving, you aren't trying"-Jordin Tootoo
PekKarlsson: The genetic mutant solution to all of Nashville and Ottawa's problems. Shea and Alfie approve.
Outside of Auld, Butler was the closest thing to a failing grade
I mean… he probably would have actually flunked out of the NHL if not for his one-way contract.
But his shootout winner was a good one, and, although his goals have been rare, they’ve come at important times.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 6, 2012 10:03 AM EST up reply actions
The record is 21-15-5
There’s a typo in the opening paragraph.
Thanks for the note
I’ve fixed that mistake.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 6, 2012 10:01 AM EST up reply actions
Nice job Peter
MacLean has to be given a lot of credit for their record. A lot of people are still mystified as to why this team is so much better than the predicted dead last. Bounce back seasons definitely play a part, but with a similar cast, MacLean has been able to get much much more from his players.
That being said this team overachieved quite a bit under Clouston. He made the playoffs with a team that everyone expected nothing from, and now we see this kind of resiliency. It does go to show this organization has pride and a backbone to make tough decisions. You can see the players won’t stand for not making the playoffs, even though everyone expects them not to. The best part about it is how bad this makes the Maple Leafs look. For all their bluster they’re still no further ahead in building a contender then they were when Sundin was still playing.
by modsuperstar on Jan 6, 2012 10:30 AM EST up reply actions
Similar cast?
I’m not sure that’s entirely accurate – considering the fire sale Bryan Murray went on mid-season and the swath of one-ways he gave out over the summer, not to mention Konopka, Turris and Daugavins occupying slots as well. I’m not sure there’s many other teams in the league that could really compare with Ottawa as far as new faces go… Philly maybe?
I think it’s a radically new cast as a matter of fact, and the fact that MacLean and his assistants are also new really helped the team start from a fresh slate. This has helped all the newbies gel as a unit because there’s no old guard vs. new blood feel to their locker room. My 0.02
Hero and Zero Count
I just posted a Fanpost showing the Heroes and Zeroes count as of halfway. Have a look at http://www.silversevensens.com/2012/1/6/2686862/heroes-and-zeroes-halfway
by wandrr on Jan 6, 2012 9:34 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Great write-up Peter
Must have taken forever to write!
Can’t argue with much of that, it’s certainly been a very exciting first half.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
So Happy For Turris
He could have had a few already. I just find he makes it look so easy. So good at finding the open man, especially at the points for a good shot, and he doesn’t force plays, that has impressed me the most. And as Peter pointed out, the best is most probably yet to come.
by I Still Miss Hossa!!! on Jan 6, 2012 10:41 AM EST reply actions
Butler
You guys are brutal-you really are. Butler is essentially a rookie…..has two overtime winners and a 2 goal game-is a natural power play guy and has very rarely played with a playmaker. If you give him a center and if you give him a shot on PP-he will produce better. Has he been lights out?-no but he also hasn’t just lost his abilities. The kid has 2 overtime game winners in the last week and you guys are essentially saying he is useless. A pro career is alongb winding road and at tghe end you might see Bulter being a better producer than all the other young players in the organization-But, I can see Ottawa letting him go and then he finds his game elsewhere if the attitude that he is failing continues..
I don't think that's what they're saying
Judging from his production last year, and the fact he was expected to at lease duplicate that same success, it can be argued that he has regressed a bit. However, strong play by other players combined with a slow start to the year means he’s been passed by other players on the depth chart. So I think that grade is justified, but I think we’ve all noticed that he’s played better of late and that he’s a streaky player. I don’t think the Sens are planning on letting go of him that quickly.
That being said, he’s a goal scorer and he needs to produce. I think he’ll have a strong second half
by I Still Miss Hossa!!! on Jan 6, 2012 11:41 AM EST up reply actions
I'm not sure where I said Butler was useless...
This is a mid-term report card. I can’t grade Butler on what he might do in the future, or what you think he might be worth. I can only grade him on his performance, and his performance so far this season has been well below expectations. Hence the low grade.
The grade probably is brutal, but Butler hasn’t played well so far this season. So he didn’t receive a very high grade. Was there something about my justification which you specifically disagree with?
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 6, 2012 11:51 AM EST up reply actions
I think the problem with that is that Butler doesn't deserve to be "given" anything
He’s been outplayed by the other forwards. That’s a fact. And he’s had time with both Spezza and Turris this year. And he hasn’t produced.
AND one of his OT winners was a freak skate deflection (though I believe Karlsson would have scored anyway) and the other was a shootout goal. He’s not producing.
I don’t think that Peter is saying he is useless; just that Butler set the expectation level last year and hasn’t lived up to it.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
Butler
He is not playing badly-his plus minus for what little ice time he was getting and on the bottom units was tops on the team for a while..again-if you watch the sens skills competition-he is one of your best shooters-if you watch him on breakaways in shootouts-he is one of your best shootout scorers…I don’t know-I agree he is not lighting it up like they hoped and paid him for but have they put him in the postition to succeed..Maybe it’s just a case of them playing pretty well-and the younger guys all playing well so he gets what he is getting and thats it.. But-off all the young guys on that team-none of them have the goalscoring potential butler does..That I do know.
I don't think Butler's talent is in question here
It’s his performance to date that’s gotten him the grade — we all know he can be better than he’s shown so far this year.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
Exactly
I’m not questioning Butler’s potential, and have been impressed by how positively he’s taken criticism and demotions this season. But the fact of the matter remains that before the season, he was expected by most to play on the top line, and had obvious chemistry with Spezza. Since then, he’s been passed on the depth chart by each of the following: Condra, Greening, Daugavins, Z. Smith, and Winchester. He’s not playing poorly, but he’s playing well below his potential, hence the low grade.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 6, 2012 12:08 PM EST up reply actions
Okay but
He’s been playing lower minutes for a reason—not because MacLean doesn’t like him or something hokey like that, but because he clearly needs to work on a combination of his game and his confidence. He’s been shooting more lately, and if he keeps doing that, his stats and ice time will improve, otherwise he will continue to deserve the same grade Peter gave him, which ‘I Still Miss Hossa!!!’ was saying above.
Butler
I think he has played well-the lines he has been put on-other than the week with Spezza and the last 2 weeks with Foligno are not lines that are asked to produce-They are asked not to get scored on and again-his plus minus is pretty good.
oh-and the comment about how he got the game winner in OT-lame, a goal is a goal.
Well, except when a goal isn't a goal...
Like in a shootout. It was great that he scored the shootout winner, but it was more impressive when he scored game-winning goals against Florida and Calgary during the actual game.
Again, I’m not disagreeing with you about Butler’s potential. In fact, quite the opposite: I agree that Butler has great potential, and the reason why his grade is so low is because his performance so far this season hasn’t matched his potential, or his expectations. I’m sure if you asked him personally, he’d be the first to tell you that he’s not performing up to his own expectations.
Finally, just a note: Try and use the ‘reply’ function when replying to other comments. (You should be able to see a ‘reply’ hyperlink at the bottom of each comment.) It helps keeps discussions like the one we’re having more coherent.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 6, 2012 12:12 PM EST up reply actions
Even if every goal is equal. Butler is averaging .100 GPG/.233 PGP. Compare that to Z. Smith @ .292/.512 or Foligno .268/.561 or Greening .195/.463. Butler was projected to have a better season than all of those guys. Lofty expectations perhaps, but a player has to be graded with respect to his potential or this would be a useless exercise. So yes he suffers from that, but his role is to score. He doesn’t provide hits/defense/PK/fighting like certain other players with higher grades. He needs to fill a top-6 slot or his effectiveness is very limited.
by billshabsriders on Jan 6, 2012 12:33 PM EST up reply actions
True, but there's only one slot open
Agreed that he needs to put up points, but a few other comments to consider: 1) I think we can all agree that guys need top six and PP time to do that, and he hasn’t had a chance to settle into that role this year – nor maybe has he earned it; but he’s not gonna light it up averaging 11:00/night, because nobody in the league does, 2) Yes, he came in as a goal scorer, and that’s why his contract was a little bigger than Greening/Condra/Smith, but it’s not like he’s breaking that bank at just over $1M – by comparison, Neil make 200% more than he does and Michalek earns 400% more, and 3) Smith is having a great year, and I’m happy for him, as he’s really earned it, and I hope he keeps it up, but it could be an anomaly; Greening is getting first line time & minutes playing with high-skill guys and picking up garbage points, and good for him, but he’d have 5 or 6 points if he was getting bottom six time consistently; to play the “relative” card – Foligno was a 1st round draft pick, is in his 5th year in the league, and earns 15% more money than Butler, and gets 3:00 more TOI/game than him, so I would hope that he’s performing better – so well, in fact, that he gets a “B” grade.
by BostonHockeyFan on Jan 6, 2012 12:50 PM EST up reply actions
Michalek also has 533% more goals though. I agree with you in that I don’t understand how Greening continues to stick around the first line, but Spezza seems to produce anyway I suppose. It’s kind of shocking that Spezza has 41 and Greening has 19 while playing almost exclusively together.
But even when Butler was given first or second line opportunities, he didn’t produce. It’s pretty hard to disagree that his performance hasn’t been good so far.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
Butler
I think it’s fair to say there are some who feel that the D grade is a little too harsh for Butler given the situation and all the variables that go along with it. Z Smith is the real deal though-I have always thought, from his first game up that he was going to be a good one..just a completely solid 2 way capable hockey player who is tough to boot. The good news is the sens are completely different and you have to give Murray credit-they have 4-5 guys who are essentially rookies who all can play in the nhl-really play. Murray has to be given his due here. Karlson is agruably the best defenseman in hockey-he is going to be a norris trophy winner -how many young defenders are you sure of earning this are there out there-the pipeline with Z-whatever, Stone, Dacosta, Lehner, all soid candidates for above average nhl careers..Back to Butler-I think in time and a little luck and some confidence as well as a great center, that he can score 25-30 a year. There are barely 2 guys-maybe 3 on each NHL team that can score that much-and that makes him somone who I am
trying to get going and giving as many opportunities as possible while still winning games. I would say at the very least and given the sens power play that perhaps a nice way to ge Butler more ice time and perhaps more chances to get on a scoring tear is to get him power play minutes -absolutely and without question, a great idea is to plug him in to the power play-give him more minutes with top 6 in an offensive
environment. This is what I would do with him-and the power play isnt that good that it cant hurt to alter it andgive soemone else a shot to produce there-Butler is a natural choice for the power play anyways..
I feel like you are still missing the key part
Which is that Butler has not earned the ice time you want to give him, because Michalek, Spezza, Alfredsson, Turris, Greening, Foligno and Neil have all outperformed him. He’s not on the fourth line because he’s not talented. He’s there because he’s not producing.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
by Mark Parisi on Jan 6, 2012 1:43 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Isn’t Neil on the 4th line and Butler on the 3rd? :P
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
First off, I really appreciate the comments
There grades are all pretty subjective and opinion-based, so it’s a good thing to discuss them. I’ll explain my responses to your points, though, in justifying my grade for him:
1. Z. Smith has shown that a player doesn’t need top six or PP time to put up more points than Butler, but that’s not really the point in my mind: The point is that before getting top-six minutes, you need to prove that you belong in the top six. Butler hasn’t yet shown Paul MacLean that he belongs there every game, so he isn’t there. He hasn’t shown me anything to that degree, either, at least not with any consistency.
2. Salary didn’t really factor into my grades, except insofar as it dictates expectations to a certain degree. The idea was to compare how the player has done so far in 2011-12 with how he was expected to do.
3. Z. Smith’s success so far could definitely be an anomaly. Butler’s lack of success so far is almost certainly an anomaly. I fully expect Butler’s offensive instincts and hard work to pay off in due time, but so far he isn’t producing. I didn’t grade him based on what might happen, and didn’t factor in whether or not his lack of success so far is an anomaly; I graded him on his performance.
As for Foligno, I didn’t really factor where a player was drafted into my grades, either, except (once again) insofar as it determines expectations of that player.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 6, 2012 1:38 PM EST up reply actions
All fair points
Not that you don’t know that already, but it’s a fun conversation, and the back-and-forth makes for interesting & entertaining banter. I respect you for hanging it out there with the grades — you’re gonna stir it up no matter where you land.
by BostonHockeyFan on Jan 6, 2012 1:53 PM EST up reply actions
It's not lame
It wasn’t even aimed at the net.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
Tough Grader
I’m glad my university professors didn’t grade as aggressively. It’s a hard job, I know. And it generates a lot of chatter. And it’s not scientific, so it’s all good.
But if we’re grading against expectations, I assume that salary and experience factor into that variable as well. So that means Greening, Condra, Cowen and maybe Daugavins get automatic “A”, no questions asked. All are dramatically out-performing relative against expectations, and for short money (except for Cowen, who has been a beast as a 19 year-old d-man).
Condra is LEADING the team in +/-, getting PP time, and lots of top six time — did anyone expect him to be anything more than a 12th or 13th forward in this team? What does he need to do to earn an “A” – adopt a Swedish last name and join the Alfie/Karlsson lovefest parada?
On the other side of the coin, Neil makes $2M/year, is a 10+ year vet and is currently -7. Phillips is at $3M/year and is currently 5th or 6th on the depth chart (reflected by pairings and TOI). Neil’s “B” is a joke and Phillips “C+” should be a “D”. At $5M/year, Gonchar does not deserve a B+. Expectations should be Spezza-like with Gonchar, and he’s been solid, but he’s not a top 25 d-man in the league, and he should be for that kind of money.
Butler’s “D” may sit well with most of your readers, and so be it. But remember that he lit it up last year while playing with the top play-making center in the AHL, and a top 10 center in the league during most of his time with the big club last year. He’s not going to put up points getting 10min of playing time/game, and virtually no PP time. It’s just not going to happen. With Alfie and Michalek producing, he’s effectively a “depth” scorer, and, if you talked with the coaching staff behind closed doors, I expect they’d tell you that they’re relatively happy with him, given the situation.
by BostonHockeyFan on Jan 6, 2012 12:15 PM EST reply actions
I agree Neil and Phillips should be lower.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
i agree that the grading is a little tough
I’ve already put myself out there as the wild optimist but in relative terms i think Karlsson deserved an A+. I don’t think any of us (except Adnan) expected Norris trophy talk outside of this fan-site for him, and it’s completely warranted.
I think Kuba deserves at least a B+ and probably an A-. only arguement for a down-grade might be his very early play but he’s been critical since the embarassing boo-ing incident.
Daugavins – when you say a guy isn’t expected to make the team and he turns into such a key depth guy (can slide from 3rd to 2nd line, important PK guy), i think a B+ is at least in order. I say the same thing for Condra.
Neil, a minus 7 is certainly an issue. but too much is made of +/- in my books. Across this team, with the goaltending we’ve had until lately, it’s especially hard to put much stock in it.
Winchester – you give him a C and the worst you can say is that he’s been injured… talk about kicking a guy when he’s down. Deserves the same incomplete that Regin got. As you said, Winch was playing well before he went down.
I don’t look at these grades like in school but rather in relation to what’s expected. I’m not trying to be a dick about what’s otherwise a great piece, I just think that if you’re going to refer consitently to expectations, you need to grade against expectations.
You're not being a dick
You’re welcome to state your opinions as long as you do so in a respectful manner. I don’t see giving Winchester a C as “kicking [him] when he’s down,” but that’s fine. You might have deserved better than a C, but I simply don’t remember him doing much this season.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 6, 2012 2:06 PM EST up reply actions
Salary is an unreasonable factor
Period. It’s incredibly myopic to simply tie statistics to money and make a claim about value.
As for Condra, fully 40% of his team-leading plus/minus rating came in the last three games. For the month of December, he was merely a plus-2, which is a far cry from where he’s at now. His plus-7 for November looks anomalous compared to December and October, where he was a minus-1. It’s a serious mistake to glance at a players’ statistics and assume they tell the story of their play through 41 games. Condra has had many invisible nights this season and is only now emerging as an impact player. His ‘B’ is too high, as far as I’m concerned.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
by Mark Parisi on Jan 6, 2012 1:26 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think salary is the single most important determinant of expectations
It’s what drives fan, management and ownership expectations. It’s just the way it is. And while I do think we could turn this discussion towards ‘value’ – Karlsson, Cowen, and Smith are great ‘value’ players this year – I agree that’s not what we’re discussing.
What we’re doing is assigning grades versus expectations. No question, Alfie, Spezza, Karlsson, Michalek and (fingers-crossed) Andersen are all having (mostly) great years — but, we’d all be moaning about ‘how they’re not carrying their load’ if they were doing what they’re doing, and that would be primarily relate-able to their salaries. If you’re ‘expected’ to get a lot of TOI, play in important situations, put up points, and be a team leader, you’re also going to command big salary. While we may choose to wrap this up in a term like “expectations”, it’s salary that’s driving the metric. (Maybe it’s the capitalist American in me…)
by BostonHockeyFan on Jan 6, 2012 5:14 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
At this point it looks like you should do a FanPost and grade the players yourself
It boils down to the fact that you view ‘comparison of play to salary’ as a crucial factor in grading players, whereas Peter does not.
This is such a rational response I had to rec it
(even though I disagree)
While I agree that in principle, you generally pay the people you expect to perform the best for your team the most amount of money, I’ve never cared for that criteria as a fan judgement.
It’s too much like the expiration date theory (which I made up working in the dairy/frozen foods department of a grocery store, natch) to me. It was always incredibly amusing to watch people to dig through multiple gallons of milk just to get one way from the back that had an expiration date just one day later. As if milk magically goes bad at midnight on the printed date!
People liked to complain that Mike Fisher was overpaid because he only cracked 50 points once. 44,47, and 48 somehow suck because they don’t magically hit that threshold set by his salary?
Gonchar is on pace for 53 points, but that’s not good enough because of how much he makes? Chara had 44 points last year and made $2M more than Gonchar. Did he not meet his salary expectations? One year removed from winning the Norris, Duncan Keith, who carries the same cap hit as Gonchar, only put up 45 points. Did he not meet his salary expectations? Is a defenseman with a high salary a failure if he doesn’t win a Norris and a Cup?
Rick Nash has a cap hit of $7.2M and he’s scored 40 or more goals just twice in eight years. Not meeting expectations? I mean, the second you start to justify Nash’s production due to the horrendous management of Columbus, you invalidate the whole theory of judging a player relative to their salary—and if you justify one player’s production, you have to justify every player’s production. Not coincidentally, that’s where I stand.
I believe there’s more to look at when it comes to evaluating a player than their statistics. For instance, in Gonchar’s case, the power play looks terrible without him, and (admittedly much less verifiably) Karlsson has made huge improvements just one year after Gonchar’s been in the organization. Did Gonchar magically (I keep using this term) make Karlsson amazing? We don’t know the daily interactions of the team, so there’s no way to know. But it’s reasonable to think Gonchar had at least some impact on Karlsson’s development—and there’s no stat for that.
That’s where I stand, anyway.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
Mark - you had me for a moment but...
I think you’ve compromised your arguement by talking simply about points. I don’t think anybody on this board looked at Fisher’s performance in terms of points. He was often a league leader in hits, Selke nominee, frequent “Monster” – that’s what he was paid was he was paid for (and BostonHockeyFan covered that, i think).
Bottom line is you’re both right, imo. For established players, expectations are (fairly) based on salary in many people’s minds. Arbitrated salaries are based on overall performance and comparables and, as such, are directly related to performance and expectations. Does anyone boo Gonchar and Kuba early this year if they were making $1.5M per season – i seriously doubt it. But, i do think that the cap has caused a distortion in the relationship btw salary and expectations. What to make of any contract 5 yrs and up in terms of expectations? Also, for unestablished young players, salary is no real reflection of expectations.
I don't feel like I compromised my argument
BostonHockeyFan’s disagreements seemed to be solely based on the salary/stats analysis (i.e. Condra is cheap and leading the team in plus/minus, Neil is earning $2M and is a minus-7, Gonchar makes $5.5M but isn’t top 25 in points) which I disagree with. I limited my rebuttal examples to points, but it’s merely correlating stats to salary as an evaluation method that I disagree with.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
If you ask Murray about how Condra is performing this year
I think he’d give a response such as: “he’s played a bigger role in the team this year than we expected”. Which means he’s exceeding expectations. Which means he’s deserving of a stellar grade.
by BostonHockeyFan on Jan 6, 2012 5:16 PM EST up reply actions
I really like Condra
Dude’s been great, and you’re right, he truly has exceeded expectations, and his role on the penalty kill has been especially important. Then again, Ottawa’s penalty kill is pretty terrible. As for plus-minus, I didn’t really include it because I consider it a fairly shallow statistic; it’s not useless, but I think its limited in a lot of ways.
But as I said in the first paragraph, the gradings also factor in the player’s performance compared with performances of players in similar roles on other teams. So Karlsson’s grade is high because he’s the highest scoring defenceman in the league, while Alfredsson is almost a point-per-game player anchoring the second line (despite his advanced age). That component of the grading is the only portion that’s brought Condra’s grade down, although I’m sure that if he keeps up his play and continues getting the prime opportunities he’s getting, that grade will improve as the season goes on. (I won’t comment on the perceived Swedish bias, because I don’t think it’s a fair criticism.)
As for the grades of mine that are too high, I still think Neil’s had a terrific season. His plus-minus might be low, but he’s still putting up a good number of points—four of which were on the powerplay, which goes some way in explaining his low plus-minus. More importantly, though, his expected contributions aren’t really on the scoreboard, but are in the more physical aspects of the game. I can think of a good number of games where Neil’s physical presence has been highly influential in the outcome of the game, and that’s a big component of his good score this season.
You’re probably right that Phillips’ grade is too high considering how far down the lineup he’s fallen, but I had very low expectations of him after last season. The fact that he’s leading the team in blocked shots despite lower ice time is a positive for a defensive defenceman like himself, though, and I think Phillips’ leadership has probably been positive for the team—although I can’t really say that with full certainty, as I’m not in the dressing room.
I stand by the grade for Gonchar. Once again, salary doesn’t really factor in, and I think Gonchar’s bounce-back this season—offensively and defensively—has surprised a good number of people.
Finally, onto Butler, I’ve really explained that pretty thoroughly in other comments, but I’ll add one more thing: Your thinking suggest that he should be given opportunities, while my thinking is that he has to earn opportunities. Alfie and Michalek aren’t the only players who’ve relegated him to a depth scorer; both Condra and Greening have come out of nowhere to bump him from a top-six spot in the lineup.
Whooo… long comment.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 6, 2012 2:01 PM EST up reply actions
I think Anderson deserves better than a C+
Maybe a B-. I’ve watched every game, and when he’s been bad, he’s been really bad. His GAA and Save % are definitely not good enough.
But the goalie stat that matters most is wins, and only one goalie in the NHL has more wins than Anderson…
I don’t think the goalie stat that matters most is wins. Otherwise Chris Osgood would be better than Dominik Hasek.
I think it is save % that is the most important stat and he’s been pretty bad at it.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
Osgood IS better than Hasek
He’s leading Hasek in not faking injuries because he’s a huge fucking coward 2-0.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
hmmm
past-poisoned Sens experience aside, some have argued Hasek is one of – if not the – best goaltenders of all time. Despite being a dick (which i’m not – thanks, Peter), Hasek is unquestionably better than Osgood. I think it’s a pretty lonely place to argue otherwise.
Statistically, probably
But I despise Hasek and have no respect for him or his accomplishments.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
the dude has a mountain of hardware
all deserved. his time in Ottawa was shite – no debating that.
it’s not just stats, the dude was an absolute winner.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominik_Ha%C5%A1ek
I know all about his hardware
But it doesn’t change my opinion of him.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
I don't know why I'd ever compare the two
But I think he’s a good actor
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
Hasek or Crowe
Because if Hasek was a better actor I’d believe he was actually injured during that series with Buffalo.
by RogerTheShrubber on Jan 6, 2012 6:01 PM EST up reply actions
I'm convinced he faked it
The Sens were in his head, and he took the coward’s way out. Ottawa would have won that series if Hasek continued to play.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
I once told Steve Shields on Twitter that he ruined my childhood in that series.
He never replied. Coward.
Z. Snake - Silver Seven
by Ryan Classic on Jan 7, 2012 12:14 AM EST up reply actions
I agree that wins are the most important from a team perspective
But they aren’t the most important thing when looking at an individual goaltender, mostly because of what I see as a reality for this year’s Senators squad: There have been at least as many nights when the Senators won despite Anderson’s play as there have been when the team won because of his play.
Anderson’s play has been getting better, but he hasn’t yet improved enough for us to forget an awful start to the season, and an awful stretch through the start of November. And the games against Pittsburgh (4GA on 8SA) and Montreal (4GA on 7SA) simply can’t happen to a starting goaltender in the NHL as often as they did for Anderson in the first half. Every guy’s going to have off games, granted, but those were terrible.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 6, 2012 2:13 PM EST up reply actions
My comment wasn't intended as a criticism of your grading, just an observation
Looking at the league goalie stats, Anderson is first in number of games played, second in saves, and third in shots against, and as I mentioned previously, tied for second in wins.
I wouldn’t give him a B, but entirely subjectively, I think he’s brought enough to the team for a B-.
He has been awful a few times, and he’s been hung out to dry by the rest of the team more than a few times. That doesn’t seem to stick with him though, and when he’s been chased, he usually comes back with a good game.
Overall, I think your grades are fair. Good read, thanks…
While I'm in "rant" mode...
How does Winchester get a “C”?
He makes close to league minimum, he’s expected to be a 12th/13th forward (in the press box as often as he’s in the lineup), he’s +3, and “working in his favour is the stability he offers to the fourth line, his penalty-killing abilities, and pretty solid point totals considering his ice time”.
So as far as I can tell, it seems like he’s meeting or exceeding all expectations – and with a smile on his face. That’s gotta be worth at least a “B”, right?
(Sorry – I obviously don’t have much to do this afternoon.)
Winchester deserves a C-. He has fewer goals than Konopka and doesn’t fight, or at least doesn’t fight well. Konopka’s a C+, then Winch is a C-.
by ojc on Jan 6, 2012 1:39 PM EST up reply actions
Winchester does not take untimely penalties
and Konopka’s role-play has improved of late. I’m not a fan of some of his antics though. anyway, there weren’t a lot of players on this team deserving the C- to C grade range except for the goaltending, agree with Konopka, and Butler. most others have had their oars in the water and playing at or above expectations since some early season eff-ups.
i thnk the Regin ‘too early to tell’ could have been applied to Winch and Carkner. Lee’s getting a bum-rush in the grade too.
Well I agreed with every single grade. How 'bout that?
I wanted to add that I’m super thrilled to have the Paulrus as coach. I honestly think he deserves a lot of credit for what will one day be the next perennial Cup contender. As someone who grew up cheering for the Wings, I can see huge similarities between Babcock and MacLean. The guy is building something, and it won’t be long before he’s won himself a Jack Adams and gets his name on the Cup again. I’d bet money on it.
by Pmoron on Jan 6, 2012 8:27 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Should Sens consider trading Kuba
I appreciate the gades and I think they are fair but the comment about trading Kuba is a no brainer to me. I mean the Sens are doing better than many expected this season but the rebuild isn’t complete. Although they seems to be in a playoff spot currently I wouldn’t mind if they don’t make it. I don’t want the Sens to be like the Montreal Canadiens always aiming for the 7th or 8th seed and most likely get knock out of the playoff in the first round. I like the potential of the guys in the minors but I think we need to draft another defensive stud for the team future.
The only problem with that is we're unlikely to get a high enough pick to accomplish this.
At some point you have to hold onto some guys. Kuba’s played well enough and he’s been a key part of the team, but it’ll be difficult to get the pick that will turn into a defensive stud. If Murray can pull it off, absolutely, although I’m skeptical.
by Pmoron on Jan 7, 2012 2:15 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
yeah, i agree
It’s not like we’re going to get a bunch for Kuba, at the age that he’s at and with the spotty past couple of years. Besides, i think we need to be wary of exposing Cowen too early – assuming he won’t have a sophmore slump. It’s been said here before and i fully agree, PO experience will be good for the young crew regardless of how well we do and I still see needing Gonchar and Kuba (and Phillips) here in a mentoring role and ensuring our young guys don’t overly expose themselves and the team.
I’ll go so far as to say that if Kuba keeps his current play up and stays healthy, that Murray should should offer him an extension.
I definitely hope there's no extension
This happened three years ago, too. The intervening two years were terrible for Kuba. I don’t know if it was bad luck or if he’s a contract-year player, but I think it’s time for both sides to move on. Especially considering contracts with Gonchar and Phillips and the emergence of Karlsson and Cowen.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 7, 2012 4:20 PM EST up reply actions
I don't think you go for an extension with Kuba
But you keep him if you’re in the playoff hunt. PO experience is good, and the deeper they go, the better the experience. I wouldn’t trade anyone if we’re in a playoff spot, BUT I also wouldn’t trade picks for anyone. Ride this team as far as you can.
Well, but we don't necessarly need the Kuba pick to be the pick where we draft the stud
If having two 2nd rounders thanks to trading Kuba gives us the ammo to move up and draft, say, Griffin Reinhart, that’s not so bad, is it?
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
Thanks, gw
If you didn’t take issue with my grading Konopka, then I presume it was a fair write-up!
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 8, 2012 10:27 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Silver Seven
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Rangers, Devils back at MSG for pivotal Game 5; NHL 13 screenshots (Playoff Puck Previews)
- CBC announces ‘While the Men Watch Hockey Night,’ sets off backlash over sexism
- Eulogy: Remembering the 2011-12 Phoenix Coyotes
- Alain Vigneault signs extension with Vancouver Canucks because he’s excellent
- Dubinsky returns for Game 5; No hearing for Brown; Spacek rips Habs (Puck Headlines)
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Carter rescues Devils; New Jersey moves within 1 win of Cup finals with 5-3 win over Rangers
- Devils-Rangers Sum
- Huberdeau, Beaulieu lead Saint John to Memorial Cup semis
- Huberdeau scores two as Sea Dogs top Cataractes 4-1 at Memorial Cup
- Scott Mellanby won't be back next season as Blues' assistant coach
