cap hit comparables:

http://www.capgeek.com/comparables/?player=744

its def right on par with what it should be
- Dozzer

those aren;t comparable to his new numbers.... that is comparing at 4.25

Yeah I believe so. The problem I see with that is the depth in the upcoming draft. It may end up being a 2014 1st or something like a 2013 4th and a 2014 2nd.
- Unholy_Forward

im sure if nonis wants a 1st, he will get it. kind of like how buffalo wanted a 1st for gaustad, and they got it from nashville

correct. but in terms of where the hockey was played(leafs zone) they got dominated
- Cherry--Skoal

yeah but they aren;t getting that many pucks to the middle of the ice.

correct. but in terms of where the hockey was played(leafs zone) they got dominated
- Cherry--Skoal

I'm curious to see how well they play defensively against a good team. Pittsburgh will be a good test for them on Wednesday.

right, but my message to carlyle is..

There is a difference between defensive hockey and giving the opposing team possession of the puck. IMO you are asking to lose.



I couldn't belive it, in the final minutes of that third the leafs had numbers to go on a rush, but instead the dumped it to the habs d and the puck went right back in the zone.


That's not defensive hockey, that's stupid hockey
- Cherry--Skoal

stupid would be going on rushes when you are protecting a lead.

it was a poopty clear, i will give you that.. but going on offense when you are protecting a lead is exactly what the leafs did before.. and how many blown leads did they have? too many to count

Of course but any player can get injured, number 87 (not comparing) is a huge risk but that is the chance you take if you feel that player is important to your franchise.
- LeafMan

Exactly. It's been over 2 years since his issues. IMO it's behind him now.

well obviously

the habs were pushing to tie the game.. and the leafs held strong

exactly the way you want a situation to play out.. anyone expecting the leafs to be a dominant team for 60mins is fooling themselves

get a lead, and fall back and protect it, keep pushing offense and we end up with blown leads.. just like it was under wilson
- Dozzer

Disagree entirely.

You play the game the same way they got you to the point where you are.

They were playing the 2-1-2 for most of the game and were succesful

They immediately switch in the third to a 1-2-2 collapse. no offensive threat. I dont like that

he did it once so now it's an automatic?
- LeftCoaster

Loser

Look at the guys that are 5-5.5, how many ppg guys?


5.25 isn't out of whack for him, yes injury/durability is a concern. But it's not out of whack.
- burn

Haha youd defend it if it was 7 per for 7 years.

Exactly. It's been over 2 years since his issues. IMO it's behind him now.
- burn

he was injured last year........

hmm overpayment for what could be a one year wonder, remember his line played 0 defense last year, same cap hit as jeff carter??? wtf

those aren;t comparable to his new numbers.... that is comparing at 4.25
- derm10

weird it defaulted back to this year

http://www.capgeek.com/co...s/?season=2013&player=744

it should work out now... if not, just go up and select next season

Of course but any player can get injured, number 87 (not comparing) is a huge risk but that is the chance you take if you feel that player is important to your franchise.
- LeafMan

Crosby is much different than Lupul though, not at all fair to compare.

Of course any player can get injured, but can and has are also not comparable. You dont give a guy who has had only one 70 game season in the past 5 years a 5 year contract and think there is nothing to be concerned about.

Either way i'm correct lol

They were dominated in the last 15 minutes.
- Cherry--Skoal

You know what I noticed? Very rarely you saw odd man rushes and the biggest observation, you didn't see the constant two defenceman follow players behind the icing line leaving the slot open.

stupid would be going on rushes when you are protecting a lead.

it was a poopty clear, i will give you that.. but going on offense when you are protecting a lead is exactly what the leafs did before.. and how many blown leads did they have? too many to count
- Dozzer

so get a 1 goal lead in the third and don't go for more is what your essentially saying?

That's not smart against Pens, flyers, rangers. etc etc

Haha youd defend it if it was 7 per for 7 years.
- sanfordnson

No. That's just absurd.

right, but my message to carlyle is..

There is a difference between defensive hockey and giving the opposing team possession of the puck. IMO you are asking to lose.

I couldn't belive it, in the final minutes of that third the leafs had numbers to go on a rush, but instead the dumped it to the habs d and the puck went right back in the zone.

That's not defensive hockey, that's stupid hockey
- Cherry--Skoal

This is absolutely correct. Lucky for the Leafs that they were playing one of the few teams that are actually going to be worse than they are. Montreal was all over the Leafs. That's not defense. That's asking to lose the game. The Leafs were happy to just sit in their own zone and hope they could hold on. Against the Habs, that might work, because they suck but against any decent or elite team, they would have lost that game.

Disagree entirely.

You play the game the same way they got you to the point where you are.

They were playing the 2-1-2 for most of the game and were succesful

They immediately switch in the third to a 1-2-2 collapse. no offensive threat. I dont like that
- Cherry--Skoal

no offense.. but thats how they played under wilson..

it leads to more blown leads than not

there are times in the game where you must protect the lead.. not try to make it bigger.. all that does is leave holes in your defense because the forwards are pushing the rush

its not good hockey. thats pond hockey.

Exactly. It's been over 2 years since his issues. IMO it's behind him now.
- burn

Thats not at all true Burnsie. 29 games two seasons ago and 66 games last year.

Not yet, hope they put Schneider back in. All teams/players are gonna have some rust, he'll be fine. One game.
- LeftCoaster

He's been playing in Europe though. Is that mid season rust?

You know what I noticed? Very rarely you saw odd man rushes and the biggest observation, you didn't see the constant two defenceman follow players behind the icing line leaving the slot open.
- LeafMan

I noticed the leafs give the canadiens the puck willingly in the 3rd period. Habs scoring a goal off of it.

Hey at the end of the day the leafs won, i cant complain (im not UG) but for god sakes..atleast tell your opposing team. "HEY don't get too cute, we will bust this the other way and pop another one"

If im alone in that thinking so be it.

so get a 1 goal lead in the third and don't go for more is what your essentially saying?

That's not smart against Pens, flyers, rangers. etc etc
- Cherry--Skoal

dont twist facts

they had a 2 goal lead until there was 6 minutes to go

so yes.. protect the lead.

he was injured last year........
- Cherry--Skoal

His issues are back related. He speperated his shoulder.... Not a recurring problem.


So anyone with a game missed ever can't be signed? Concidered injury prone?

no offense.. but thats how they played under wilson..

it leads to more blown leads than not

there are times in the game where you must protect the lead.. not try to make it bigger.. all that does is leave holes in your defense because the forwards are pushing the rush

its not good hockey. thats pond hockey.
- Dozzer

disagree. you dont give the puck to the other team for a full period...EVER!

You learn that in novice.

I noticed the leafs give the canadiens the puck willingly in the 3rd period. Habs scoring a goal off of it.

Hey at the end of the day the leafs won, i cant complain (im not UG) but for god sakes..atleast tell your opposing team. "HEY don't get too cute, we will bust this the other way and pop another one"

If im alone in that thinking so be it.
- Cherry--Skoal

nevermind that the habs goal came from a scrum in front of the net during a PP then?

guess that had nothing to do with it?