Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes


Full Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Everything posted by IceFrog999

  1. I'm not too worried about that. We typically have a great March, no matter what the schedule. The past two seasons, we've gone 19-3-3 in March. 41 out of 50 possible points.
  2. "Any chance bringing back Tanabe will backfire on us?" *months later* "You lied to me!"
  3. It was just a rumor going around. There was never any concrete proof that he was asking for anywhere near that amount.
  4. The problem is, Ward had plenty of time to rest before the playoffs started. He was pulled in his last game, taking the 3rd period off. Then Leighton started the last game of the season. Then there was the 3 days between the end of the regular season and the start of the playoffs. So Ward had almost an entire week off between games before playing his 14 game stretch (before the possible injury) in the playoffs. Ward played in 68 games, which is about normal for a starting goaltender when the team doesn't have a reliable backup goaltender (such as the Thomas/Fernandez combo). And in those 68 games, he won 39 of them, a 58% winning percentage. Leighton played in 19 games, won 6 of them, a 31% winning percentage. Playing Leighton more than last year doesn't make any sense. In my opinion, of course.
  5. The Panthers, Blue Jackets, Bruins stretch? I think the whole team kind of failed in those games. Especially considering between the BJs and the Bruins game, Ward posted a shutout against Buffalo.
  6. Yeah, that's what I said. I honestly asked a question there. The only time I saw Ward falter which might be attributed to overplaying him was the ECFs, but I believe Maurice said Ward was injured in Game 1 of that series, which would explain his poor play. Granted, that injury may have been because we overplayed him, but is it not true that Ward played his best hockey of the season during the stretch from late Feb to early April?
  7. When was Ward worn down? He had his best stretch of the season when he played the 20+ games in a row. Really, the less we have to rely on Leighton, the better.
  8. Never have I claimed anything I found over at HFBoards as my own, always either saying "on other boards" or "news around the league". Unless, of course, it's stuff I myself posted on HFBoards and simply posted over here to get more opinions. I'd give full credit for anything I find if I could, however, the last time I linked to HFBoards, Ref deleted the links because he believed it was advertising for said boards. And what's the big deal about knowing who I am on other boards? And yes, there are others who have been following the sport longer than I have and have a better knowledge of the sport/other teams/players than I have. For instance, I'd never disagree with anything TSA factually says about the Bruins, since he's got a better knowledge of that team (and other Boston teams) than I have. However, there's certain times when following a player/team longer doesn't mean jack. For instance, if Carolina suddenly picks up Petr Sykora, someone who's followed Jersey for a while may have great insight into Sykora's play during his tenure with the Devils. But considering he stopped playing there almost 10 seasons ago, it'd probably be better to judge what you're getting from his recent play on the Penguins. Now, I admit I may have read too much into the Babchuk interview, but that doesn't mean that 2 million would be the ballpark asking price.
  9. Only if I'm wrong. If the majority of the boardgoers do about the same amount of research I do, then I'm being egotistical and I'm acting like a horse's behind. If they don't, I'm simply stating facts. But as I stated before, I don't believe the majority goes to that length.
  10. Possibly, but I simply don't see that being wrong. If they had put in the same kind of time and effort, then they'll be able to come up with a better counterargument than "You think you're all that, but you're not!". Notice I said the majority don't. Obviously, some have done their research and still disagree with me, and that's fine. People don't always see eye to eye. But I believe the majority get their information about a player from YouTube videos and NHL highlights after the player has already been signed.
  11. Obviously the question is asked because the reporter is trying to get a definite number, and the question is blown off because the agent and Babs don't want to get locked into a number in case a team decides to overpay him (and overpayments never happen, right?). Like I said, based off his play, the numbers he put up, his age, and the contracts of defensemen similar to him, 2 million is about what Babs should be making. His history with the KHL means he'll probably be offered less than that, probably about 1.5-1.7, but somewhere in that ballpark. As for being more informed that the rest, it depends on how much research the rest do. Obviously, I don't have any inside connections, but the Internet and Center Ice can give you pretty much everything you need to know about a player. Find out about a player, get his history from the various hockey sites, watch him play a couple games on Center Ice, his styles, tendencies, etc, and then determine if he'd be a good fit with the team and how much he should be asking for. So yes, I'd say in general, I'm more informed than most. That's not to say others can't do the same, I'm using resources available to everyone. I'm just assuming that the majority don't put the same kind of time and effort that I do.
  12. Hmmm...Just a couple suggestions. Corvo's OT goal against Florida was ranked the #10 goal of the entire league of last season, the only Cane goal to make that list. Based off that, I'd rank Corvo's as #1. Jussi's goal against the Devils is an important goal, but if you're ranking it on difficulty to perform, and not importance, that's nowhere near #1. A couple goals I was surprised to see left off the list: Chad's 2nd goal against the Islanders (3/20) - Just a pretty setup by Whitney, finding Chad all alone after the entire Islander defense collapses on Whitney. Samsonov's goal against the Flames (3/6) - As Forslund put it: The steal and the deal. Picks off a lead pass and freezes McBackup for an easy goal. Babchuk's goal against Washington (3/21) - Not the prettiest goal out there, but the hands he had and patience he showed were very un-Babslike. Samsonov's goal against the Devils (3/18) - The definition of tick-tack passing. Brindamour to Jokinen to Samsonov. Staal's 2nd goal against the Lightning (3/7) - Just an example of the chemistry Staal and Cole have together. Cole's surrounded by defenders, but puts the puck to a location where he knows Staal's going to be, gives Staal a breakaway.
  13. I didn't say he said he wanted 2M. I said he hinted at it. Sometimes, especially when it comes to contract negotiations, you've got to read between the lines. The reporter asks about a 2 million dollar contract, and Babchuk essentially avoids the question. Why choose that number in the first place unless Babchuk or his agent had mentioned it?
  14. 1.4 per is a steal, no matter what you think of the Johnson situation here.
  15. From the interview posted around the boards here. He said he wanted more than the $1 million, and the interviewer asked what if they had offered $2 million. It'd be about the kind of raise you'd expect him to get as well. If he does sign elsewhere, I expect a multi-year deal anywhere from the 1.7-2.4 million range.
  16. As has been stated, Babchuk's not heading to Russia. He does that, he's not playing in the NHL again, which is something he wants to do. He's got a couple teams interested, the Rangers I know for sure. Is it so hard to believe that a 25-year old defenseman that scored 16 goals wouldn't have any trouble finding another team? Especially if he's only asking for 2 million, the amount he's hinted at.
  17. I think they're are very few who've called this a terrible signing. The only way it'd be a terrible signing is if we overpaid for his abilities, and at the moment, he'd have to be really terrible to not earn this contract. The 2nd year, when he gets the raise, it'll be harder for him to earn that amount (assuming he plays like he has in the past), but still not a major overpayment. I'll also say that while a lot of players have "resurrected" their careers here, there are others that have failed to do just that. Carter and Melichar are two off the top of my head. So while we should wait for a player to take the ice before condemning him, we should also wait before assuming his play will take a jump because of the "Carolina effect".
  18. Yes, Wallin and Alberts would be the third pairing, but we'd never win an away game if they're paired together. Opposing coaches would match their speediest line against that pairing and it'd be a shooting gallery. Both defensemen can be beat on the outside against speedier forwards. And he didn't stink in Philly. In fact, most Philly fans aren't happy that the money was spent on Jones instead of Alberts. However, it is possible to like a guy and still point out the flaws in his game, which is the general statement that I'm seeing from a lot of them. Big guy, great bottom pairing, has brain farts at the worst possible times.
  19. That certainly helps, but you understand the logic then. You can't judge a player's talent when they're playing a bottom-feeding team. Not to mention, I'd assume Chara played top pair minutes while Alberts was much less.
  20. The pressure comment came from Philly fans, the fanbase that has seen his play most recently and thus has a general idea of what we're getting. I could look at the time Alberts spent in Boston, but considering the state of the Bruins during the years he played there, it's hard to get a good report on what Alberts is. He did play well in Boston during that time, but considering where Boston ended up in the standings, it's hard to tell if he stood out because of talent, or because he was an average player on a bad team. It's why I didn't bring up Albert's -15 in his last year with Boston, because Boston wasn't a good team and thus, it's expected to have a low +/- stat. As for the rest, I have only one problem with Alberts playing the 3rd pairing, and it was already stated: Who's he going to be partnered with? Wallin typically plays the 3rd, and having those two together is just asking for trouble. Thus, either Wallin or Alberts would have to play in the Top 4, and as you said, neither is a Top 4 player. Now, this is all moot if JR does go and get a Top 4 defenseman in FA, but if he doesn't, we've got a problem.
  21. You say that, and that's what I'm talking about. They hit the puck carrier and now they have the puck. If they turn over the puck when they're moving the puck out of the zone (ie: Not safely), it's a bad defensive play. And before you say the other team will be playing defense because they don't have the puck, all teams keep a forechecker to pressure the puck carrier. If Alberts turns over the puck on that forecheck, it's a bad defensive play. And of course, there's always the offensive zone set up as well. Both defenseman are at the point, the puck comes to Alberts, and he's immediately pressured by a forward. If he turns over the puck, it could lead to a 2-on-1 or a breakaway.
  22. It's real simple. No defenseman should crack under pressure and give up the puck. However, if a defenseman does, it's a bigger fault in defensive defensemen than it is in offensive defensemen, because at least offensive defenseman have the offensive tendencies to offset these mistakes. If a defensive defenseman constantly turns the puck over because of pressure, he's not a good defensive defenseman. So when you say this: It makes no sense. So you're saying if Gleason turns the puck over in his zone and it leads to a goal, it's more acceptable than if Corvo did the same thing?
  23. Going to have to clear that up for me, because that's got nothing to do with what I said.
  24. Sorry, I don't buy that. It's more understandable for an offensive-minded defensman to turn the puck over, since they're offensive-minded and aren't exactly known for their defensive prowess. If we're making Alberts out to be a stay at home, defensive defenseman, he should be more adept to handling the pressure of on-coming forwards. If he's turning the puck over in his own zone, he's not a good defensive defenseman. Not to mention, there are different types of offensive defenseman. There are those that are the setup men, the ones that make the outlet pass and find the open man in the offensive zone. They're the adept puckhandlers, and making the outlet pass, the ones that shouldn't be straining under pressure. Pitkanen, and Kaberle to an extent, would be those defensemen on our team. The other type would be your cannon from the point, your Corvos and Babchuks. They're not suppose to have the puck on their stick long enough to worry about an outlet pass. Their job is to either pass it to the defensive partner in the defensive zone or fire it from the point in the offensive zone.
  25. No, I can compare the two players, because while their game is completely different, their skill set isn't as far off as some seem to think. Both are slow defenseman that tend to strain under pressure (as young defensemen tend to do), but for whatever reason, that's a fault of Babchuk and completely ignored when it comes to Alberts. Now, I can understand that he's a shiny new acquisition and most have high hopes, want to give him a chance, don't want to get too down on him, etc., but he's not the answer most seem to be building him up to be. Yes, we need another tough, stay at home guy, but we needed one that could play in the Top 4. As I stated before, he's a Wallin-clone. Slow, physical, and not talented enough to make an impact on the game. I want him to work out as much as the next person (especially considering his salary jumps 500k next season), but with the talk of him "solidifying our defense" and "jumping into the Top 4", it worries me. This guy's not a Top 4 defenseman any more than Babchuk was.
  • Create New...