Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Prucenterrules

Semin to carolina

90 posts in this topic

And he is wrong, and he is constantly wrong about these issues. Constantly. How many players do I have to list brought in by New Jersey because they were sure things only to find out they weren't? It's Lou's one big hangup, he continues to insist that age is a number when it is so much more than that. Larionov, Mogilny and Malakhov redux, Rolston redux, Holik redux, Arnott redux - about the only one he's gotten right was Sykora, but he's ready to blow that one too.

Hedberg is, by his last two years' stats, the best backup available. It's just really hard for me to have faith that this guy who has always been a below-average goalie has suddenly figured it out at 40.

Rolston had been solid before coming to the Devils, and wasn't showing any signs of becoming the trainwreck he ultimately became as a Devil. Hard to say how much that high-ankle sprain screwed him up, but I could understand the move at the time, even though the contract was risky with its length, given Rolston's age.

But yeah, Lou has gone to the ex-Devil well a lot, with little payoff.

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't bother me really. I think he signed with the closest team because he wasn't motivated enough to pack up his stuff and move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't bother me really. I think he signed with the closest team because he wasn't motivated enough to pack up his stuff and move.

Raleigh and DC are nowhere close :rolleyes:

But I agree it shouldnt bother anyone, he chose Carolina and thats that.

Edited by Zubie#8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rolston had been solid before coming to the Devils, and wasn't showing any signs of becoming the trainwreck he ultimately became as a Devil. Hard to say how much that high-ankle sprain screwed him up, but I could understand the move at the time, even though the contract was risky with its length, given Rolston's age.

That's the point. That's exactly the point I am making. There are no sure things, ever, so that's one. Number 2 is, the older the player we're talking about, the less sure you are. That's why things like Holik and Arnott aren't bad, all things considered - they were here for a year. There's not much risk there. But with 4 years, that contract is basically untradeable if Rolston disappoints at all.

Rolston played his best as a Devil during his last days with the team - that was when he was given good linemates.

But yeah, Lou has gone to the ex-Devil well a lot, with little payoff.

It's not just ex-Devil - he's gone to the old-player well a lot. And he hasn't had all that much success doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Certain defensemen and goaltenders age well which is why Salvador, Zidlicky, and Hedberg do not scare me. Old forwards scare the hell out of me which is why I hated the Rolston contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Certain defensemen and goaltenders age well which is why Salvador, Zidlicky, and Hedberg do not scare me. Old forwards scare the hell out of me which is why I hated the Rolston contract.

Players like Salvador age terribly. At best you get someone like Luke Richardson or Sean O'Donnell who hung on well past their usefulness - somehow Sean O'Donnell played in the NHL last year. At worst - well, I think we all know what that looks like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Players like Salvador age terribly. At best you get someone like Luke Richardson or Sean O'Donnell who hung on well past their usefulness - somehow Sean O'Donnell played in the NHL last year. At worst - well, I think we all know what that looks like.

Haha had no idea O'Donnell played last year, personally for whatever I do not mind certain defensemen getting multi year deals but I understand the concern about Sal.

...maybe I just like Sal too much :evil:

Edited by Zubie#8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not just ex-Devil - he's gone to the old-player well a lot. And he hasn't had all that much success doing it.

Well...it's the old ex-Devil well. I think goalies are a different story because depending on the style, and usually it's butterfly, you can keep getting better and better with age. There is so many technical things you can improve on. That's what you are seeing from goalies like Hedberg. Doesn't often happen with skaters.

Edited by devilsrule33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the point. That's exactly the point I am making. There are no sure things, ever, so that's one. Number 2 is, the older the player we're talking about, the less sure you are. That's why things like Holik and Arnott aren't bad, all things considered - they were here for a year. There's not much risk there. But with 4 years, that contract is basically untradeable if Rolston disappoints at all.

Rolston played his best as a Devil during his last days with the team - that was when he was given good linemates.

It's not just ex-Devil - he's gone to the old-player well a lot. And he hasn't had all that much success doing it.

Did you not like the Rolston deal at the time? I couldn't dig up the Rolston signing thread. Yeah, the downside is rough for a guy like Rolston if he sucks right off the bat for sure (not too many teams are going to rush to trade for a guy who seemingly ages overnight), but Rolston seemed as likely to succeed as anyone would in that position...Lou rolled the dice on that one, but I don't remember too many fans not liking the signing when it was announced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you not like the Rolston deal at the time? I couldn't dig up the Rolston signing thread. Yeah, the downside is rough for a guy like Rolston if he sucks right off the bat for sure (not too many teams are going to rush to trade for a guy who seemingly ages overnight), but Rolston seemed as likely to succeed as anyone would in that position...Lou rolled the dice on that one, but I don't remember too many fans not liking the signing when it was announced.

I think people were just excited because Rolston was a huge name that off-season (2nd to Hossa I believe), and the Devils actually went after a big fish (one that everyone was gunning for), and he chose them. After losing Niedermayer, Rafalski and Gomez in the prior years and replacing them with nothing substantial, there was some excitement. Add in the fact that the 2008 playoffs were so miserable for everyone. But not everyone agreed that it was a good signing. And some that were happy knew that the numbers could be trouble, but at least thought they could get two very solid years.

Maybe a retrospect for later in the summer. On second thought..naaah.

Edited by devilsrule33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you not like the Rolston deal at the time? I couldn't dig up the Rolston signing thread. Yeah, the downside is rough for a guy like Rolston if he sucks right off the bat for sure (not too many teams are going to rush to trade for a guy who seemingly ages overnight), but Rolston seemed as likely to succeed as anyone would in that position...Lou rolled the dice on that one, but I don't remember too many fans not liking the signing when it was announced.

I loved it, I think, but I've learned a lot about hockey in those 4 years, and I think had the Devils signed that deal now, I'd hate it. I did say if Rolston's game went south he'd still cut it as a checking line player, which turned out to be true, but that's a job he didn't see himself being fit for. I'd hate it if they signed Shane Doan to a similar 4 year deal, and not just because Vanderbeek opened his wallet the other day and a moth flew out.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I loved it, I think, but I've learned a lot about hockey in those 4 years, and I think had the Devils signed that deal now, I'd hate it. I did say if Rolston's game went south he'd still cut it as a checking line player, which turned out to be true, but that's a job he didn't see himself being fit for. I'd hate it if they signed Shane Doan to a similar 4 year deal, and not just because Vanderbeek opened his wallet the other day and a moth flew out.

So you're basically now against these kinds of signings in general...that the upside simply doesn't outweigh the risks, guys around 35 can lose it overnight, etc. I can understand that, and agree with it...they are very risky deals, especially since by their nature they are almost sure to result in two or more years below the money value of the deal.

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd hate it if they signed Shane Doan to a similar 4 year deal, and not just because Vanderbeek opened his wallet the other day and a moth flew out.

another good one - i will continue to quote these as they are legit LOL moments for me

Edited by sundstrom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you're basically now against these kinds of signings in general...that the upside simply doesn't outweigh the risks, guys around 35 can lose it overnight, etc. I can understand that, and agree with it...they are very risky deals, especially since by their nature they are almost sure to result in two or more years below the money value of the deal.

I'm not against if you have a team that is really excellent and wants another piece and feels like they can overcome that bad contract. Like, if the Rangers signed Doan to a 4 year deal, it wouldn't be the worst thing they ever did. But you've really got to have a good organization, you have to have faith that in 3 or 4 years, you will have a young player whose value will offset the negative value of that oldster. I don't think the Devils were in that spot in 2008-09 - their defense wasn't strong enough, and their prospect base wasn't quite there. Then again, the Kovalchuk trade changed a lot of things about the organization.

another good one - i will continue to quote these as they are legit LOL moments for me

Thanks; I can't take credit for that one, I think I read that moth joke on Twitter and repurposed it for this.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0