You are not connected. Please login or register

 » The other NHL teams » General Hockey talk » Teams on the decline

Teams on the decline

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Go down  Message [Page 2 of 3]

16Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 4:43 pm

Ev


Franchise Player
Franchise Player
SpezDispenser wrote:The Pens look like Dung too - and they have Leclaire version 2.0 in net.

Hahahahahaha Leclaire wishes he was Marc-Andre Fleury.

17Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 5:31 pm

wprager


Administrator
Administrator
Anaheim?

18Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:14 pm

stempniaksen


Veteran
Veteran
SpezDispenser wrote:Simple.

Name 4 teams that you think are on the decline - and why.

1.Minnesota Wild - they're declining all right - all the way a lottery pick with no distinguishable talent coming - although I like Granlund. Fragile, soft players like Havlat, PM Bouchard, Brent Burns, Josh Harding (who's broken) etc.

2.NY Rangers - the calm before they start to get better, they are deplorable. Crap D, questionable F. The only great thing is Gaborik and Lundqvist.

3.NJ Devils - yes indeed. One of the big reasons is Kovalchuk. They have Rolston who's 106 years old, Arnott who's about to sail off to another team, Elias who never really got 100% over the hepatitis, Langenbrunner who is awesome, but will likely have to be let go next summer, a young-enough, but breaking down Volchenkov signed for 6 years ( Facepalm ) and last, but not least - Martin Brodeur who's not only getting older, but so far, is starting to lose his reflexes a little.

4.San Jose - don't like their D, don't like their goaltending. Big problems coming.

The only team I'm gonna disagree with there is the Rangers, if anything they are on their way up. It's looks grim now, but they have tons of solid young players (Staal, Girardi, Del Zotto, Dubinsky, Callahan) who will only get better and they also have some amazing young prospects on the way (Anisimov, Grachev, Stepan, Kreider, McDonaugh, ect) and with Lundqvist and Gaborik signed long-term it looks promising.

19Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:51 pm

SeawaySensFan

SeawaySensFan
Franchise Player
Franchise Player
1. Montreal Canadiens: dubious franchise player in Carey Price, superstar money paid to "good" players (long-term), about 25 years of poor drafting

2. New Jersey Devils: Fraudeur at the mercy of his own team, no longer focused on making him look good with stifling, boring style, now attempting a more aggressive, offensive brand of hockey to sell seats; overspending on that new philosophy on one player will hurt for years to come

3. Detroit Red Wings: Aging core, fooled themselves into thinking that they could keep drafting in the later rounds and always finding hidden gems

4. Chicago Black Hawks: Already on a slippery slope of top-heavy spending on long-term deals; being the son of the overrated Scotty Bowman isn't good enough to ensure success

20Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 8:08 pm

PTFlea

PTFlea
Co-Founder
Co-Founder
Big Ev wrote:
SpezDispenser wrote:The Pens look like Dung too - and they have Leclaire version 2.0 in net.

Hahahahahaha Leclaire wishes he was Marc-Andre Fleury.

That'll work out well for him...because he's quite similar. Fleury has tons of fanfare for winning the Cup with the Pens, but watch closely and you'll see what I mean.

And no, I don't think the Pens will win another Cup with him. He's like Leclaire, not good enough.

:crossarms:

EDIT: I'd obviously rather Fleury though, I guess my point was that they are (IMO) very similar in technique and skill.

21Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 8:56 pm

Ev

Ev
Franchise Player
Franchise Player
I know, Fleury isn't the best, but I would also rather have him as he has proven to be good in big games.

and now he's getting rocked by the Leafs lol

22Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:15 pm

PTFlea

PTFlea
Co-Founder
Co-Founder
Big Ev wrote:I know, Fleury isn't the best, but I would also rather have him as he has proven to be good in big games.

and now he's getting rocked by the Leafs lol

We chatted about this in the summer I think, Fleury is horrible and he's gonna be exposed this year (IMO).

23Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:39 pm

Ev

Ev
Franchise Player
Franchise Player
He's very talented, was drafted #1 overall, reached the Final twice, has already won a Cup, and makes some big saves when needed. He's inconsistent and relies on reflexes and agility a lot, but he is far from horrible. The Pens wouldn't have invested that much in him if he was a horrible goalie.

He hasn't started off well but that's probably because this isn't the true Penguins team yet. I doubt this is the year he gets "exposed" as the Penguins vastly improved their D in the summer. I don't think his numbers will improve all that much, but I definately don't think they will decline either.

Fleury is not among the elite, but he is not horrible.
Just my 2 cents anyway Smile

24Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:42 pm

stempniaksen

stempniaksen
Veteran
Veteran
On his good days he's a top-five goalie in the league, takes too many nights off though.

25Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 10:09 pm

PTFlea

PTFlea
Co-Founder
Co-Founder
Horrible might be an overstatement. He's adequate. He can be really good, but he can crap the bed with the best of them. Very inconsistent, which is not good for a number one goalie.

26Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 10:25 pm

wprager

wprager
Administrator
Administrator
SpezDispenser wrote:Horrible might be an overstatement. He's adequate. He can be really good, but he can crap the bed with the best of them. Very inconsistent, which is not good for a number one goalie.

4 goals on 14 shots tonight. Ladies and gentlemen, your NHL league-leading Toronto Maple Leafs!


_________________
Hey, I don't have all the answers. In life, to be honest, I've failed as much as I have succeeded. But I love my wife. I love my life. And I wish you my kind of success.
- Dicky Fox

27Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 10:46 pm

Riprock

Riprock
All-Star
All-Star
I don't know how you cannot mention Ottawa. Prospects aside, and even then all teams have prospects, and Ottawa's is hardly the deepest and most promising of all the teams, you cannot deny this team has consistently disappointed. Playoff appearances for a dozen years with one finals appearance, and questionable goaltending, player and coach controversy, and injuries, etc etc.

Now we have, at least for the last 2 playoff games and last 3 regular season games, a goalie that is playing very well and giving us a chance to win, and the rest of the team cannot produce.

And for the rest of the teams, as mentioned:
- New Jersey obviously since they can't even ice a full team.
- The Rangers for having the highest paid AHL player

And on the Rise: The Leafs

28Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 11:26 pm

Hoags

Hoags
All-Star
All-Star
Dash wrote:I don't know how you cannot mention Ottawa. Prospects aside, and even then all teams have prospects, and Ottawa's is hardly the deepest and most promising of all the teams, you cannot deny this team has consistently disappointed.

Largely due to having this man behind the bench in the past for so long:

Teams on the decline - Page 2 Jacques_martin

29Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 11:44 pm

LeCaptain

LeCaptain
All-Star
All-Star
SpezDispenser wrote:Simple.

Name 4 teams that you think are on the decline - and why.

1.Minnesota Wild - they're declining all right - all the way a lottery pick with no distinguishable talent coming - although I like Granlund. Fragile, soft players like Havlat, PM Bouchard, Brent Burns, Josh Harding (who's broken) etc.

2.NY Rangers - the calm before they start to get better, they are deplorable. Crap D, questionable F. The only great thing is Gaborik and Lundqvist.

3.NJ Devils - yes indeed. One of the big reasons is Kovalchuk. They have Rolston who's 106 years old, Arnott who's about to sail off to another team, Elias who never really got 100% over the hepatitis, Langenbrunner who is awesome, but will likely have to be let go next summer, a young-enough, but breaking down Volchenkov signed for 6 years ( Teams on the decline - Page 2 489887 ) and last, but not least - Martin Brodeur who's not only getting older, but so far, is starting to lose his reflexes a little.

4.San Jose - don't like their D, don't like their goaltending. Big problems coming.


Great young D-men, some nice offensive prospects (that Stepan kid is something) and a top 5 goalie for the next 5-10 years.
Are you sure they are on the decline? It sounds to me they are more on the rise than anything else.

Same thing for San Jose, I mean Pavelski and COuture, McGinn will probably be top 6 (we don't even have one prospect as good as them) and they are very young. Demers and Vlasic are under 23 and look pretty solid, and I like Petrecki.

I think our future at forward is pretty alarming to be honest with you, mentionning Spezza doesn't mean anything, he will never do anything without another legit 1st liner on his line, something when Alfie retires, we won't have and there's 0 sign of someone coming in. Let's be more objective here Teams on the decline - Page 2 54934

30Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 11:53 pm

LeCaptain

LeCaptain
All-Star
All-Star
wprager wrote:Anaheim?

best 1st line in the league + probably 3 future top 4 Defensemen, not counting a top 3 overall pick next year.
I somehow agree, but only short term. I think their worst year will be this year and next year it's going up again.

31Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 11:55 pm

LeCaptain

LeCaptain
All-Star
All-Star
SeawaySensFan wrote:1. Montreal Canadiens: dubious franchise player in Carey Price, superstar money paid to "good" players (long-term), about 25 years of poor drafting

2. New Jersey Devils: Fraudeur at the mercy of his own team, no longer focused on making him look good with stifling, boring style, now attempting a more aggressive, offensive brand of hockey to sell seats; overspending on that new philosophy on one player will hurt for years to come

3. Detroit Red Wings: Aging core, fooled themselves into thinking that they could keep drafting in the later rounds and always finding hidden gems

4. Chicago Black Hawks: Already on a slippery slope of top-heavy spending on long-term deals; being the son of the overrated Scotty Bowman isn't good enough to ensure success

In 5 years may be, I have them winning another cup soon. They're just too good now that even a decline would be a year similar to last, 2nd round playoffs exit-ish.

32Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Wed Oct 13, 2010 11:57 pm

LeCaptain

LeCaptain
All-Star
All-Star
wprager wrote:
SpezDispenser wrote:Horrible might be an overstatement. He's adequate. He can be really good, but he can crap the bed with the best of them. Very inconsistent, which is not good for a number one goalie.

4 goals on 14 shots tonight. Ladies and gentlemen, your NHL league-leading Toronto Maple Leafs!

Does it really mean anything? I mean Leclaire was the Sens best player and let in 5 goals...
Leafs right now = playing awsome hockey.

33Teams on the decline - Page 2 Empty Re: Teams on the decline on Thu Oct 14, 2010 12:05 am

PTFlea

PTFlea
Co-Founder
Co-Founder
The Rangers are a team that's probably on the upswing, same with Minnesota when they get a lottery pick this year, ditto Anaheim. It's pretty fast, the Sens were horrible from the BS 15-2 run to when Clouston took over, they got really lucky with Wiercioch and really lucky with Karlsson and Lehner, three picks that were relatively low except for Karlsson's middle of the pack. We'll see...a tad soft maybe on the backend, and as people have mentioned, no sniper in the fold with the possible exceptions of Butler, Hoffman and Petersson.

I don't think Ottawa will be on the decline a lot from here on in. They have to handle their young talent very carefully, but if we get really lucky and they all pan out, this is going to be a real fun team to watch in 3 years.

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 3]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum