| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| polishexpress |
Posted - 06/26/2011 : 16:38:57
Where will Brad Richards choose to go as a UFA? Explain why. |
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Guest2563 |
Posted - 10/04/2011 : 15:42:39
NEW YORK RANGERS ALREADY HAVE HIM SO my prediction is the big apple
|
| Guest2563 |
Posted - 10/04/2011 : 15:34:51
i think new york because well HES ALREADY ON THE RANGERS
 |
| Pasty7 |
Posted - 07/06/2011 : 10:57:52
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
the cap hit is reasonable - there is not much reasonable about the deal itself. Actual pay does not go below 7M until the 7th year of the deal, and is 12M for each of the first 2 seasons. Signing bonuses due in each of the first 6 years of varying amounts, that get paid by the team that owns him. And a NMC that allows him to nix any deal.
If Brad Richards should suddenly falter, it would be very hard to move this deal.
The habs would probably trade a former 20 goal scorer and a blue chip first rounder for him ... if he falters,,,,, oh wait we already did that with the last big center the Rangers signed lol
"I led the league in "Go get 'em next time." - Bob Uecker
|
| nuxfan |
Posted - 07/06/2011 : 09:46:55
the cap hit is reasonable - there is not much reasonable about the deal itself. Actual pay does not go below 7M until the 7th year of the deal, and is 12M for each of the first 2 seasons. Signing bonuses due in each of the first 6 years of varying amounts, that get paid by the team that owns him. And a NMC that allows him to nix any deal.
If Brad Richards should suddenly falter, it would be very hard to move this deal. |
| Guest4312 |
Posted - 07/06/2011 : 09:19:11
i think the contract they got richards for... i believe 9 years 60 million was actually a very reasonable deal and if he does faulter won't be that hard of a player to move later in life |
| leigh |
Posted - 07/05/2011 : 17:20:38
Brad Richards is Broadway bound boyz.
http://www.pickuphockey.com/hockeynews.aspx?article=7029371146 |
| n/a |
Posted - 07/01/2011 : 08:32:35
That's interesting, Ryan - but I don't believe it fully.
The Rangers have shown in the past that as an organisation, they totally lose all sense of reality when offering free agents money and term.
One thing I am confident of, is that Burke already has a price ceiling, and he won't go above it, no matter what. And that's good, because I really don't think Richards should get more than 8 mil . . . frankly, I think he's a 6.5, 7 mil guy myself.
I am leaning now towards the Leafs taking a pass on Richards, letting the Rangers take him, and getting their top line center through a trade.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| ryan93 |
Posted - 07/01/2011 : 04:42:41
Well if you can believe what you read in the NY papers, the Rangers are only willing to go up to $8 million a year. Anything higher than that, and they are going in another route.
I have no idea what kind of term Richards is looking for, but if it is a contract that takes him to 40, can you blame him Guest4312? Look at all of the big contracts signed in recent years..Hossa, Luongo, Ehroff, Zetterberg, Kovalchuk, Keith, Franzen, etc etc...all will be around 40 (or more) when their contracts expire.
While you never know how a player will fair as he enters his mid 30's, as long as he stays healthy, i think Richards is the type of guy that can continue to be a productive player in his later seasons, i'll use Joe Sakic as an example. |
| Guest4312 |
Posted - 06/30/2011 : 15:40:51
okay brad richards makes sense for a lot of teams, i won't lie. but here's the thing: i really don't want him for my team. i can see why the leafs, lightning, sabres, hurricanes, detroit, canadiens and other teams mentioned to be in the hunt for richards want him, simply enough he is a good playmaking center with tons of offense.
the fact is richards best years are probably behind him he may get 4-5 productive years to come... exactly why he's looking for a 7-10 year deal. the first half of the contract he signs will be awesome and the team he goes to will compete... after those first 5 or so they will be haunted by that contract if they didn't win a cup in that time. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 06/30/2011 : 12:18:09
Check that, Richards was a higher cap hit last season than Lecavalier was. Why does Richards take a pay-cut again??
I think Richards could get $8+ million from a NYR offer, so I think when he says he would take less, it's less than market value. But that does not mean a cut in pay??
And why is Tampa Bay cash strapped again?? Maybe they used to be, but since Jeff Vinik took over they are fine. They have spent a ton of money and have committed to winning.
Sorry Nux, I just can't see this logic. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 06/30/2011 : 11:59:49
quote:
Help me understand how signing Richards to what most people assume will be a $7+ million/year deal will be saving money??
Richards has stated that he is willing to take less to play in TB, so I'm only speculating based on what he's said (or what he's been reported to have said). I don't know what "less" is, but if he does end up in TB, I would not be surprised to see a 7M (maybe a bit less, I don't know) cap hit for, say, 7 years.
7M < 7.7M, and 49M < 55-65M
If TB cannot get him for that kind of cap hit, or at least a cap hit less than Lecavalier, then I don't think they'd bother. Even if they get a 7.7M cap hit, the amount of money owed to Richards would still be less than what they owe to Lecavalier, especially in the next 5 years. For a cash-poor franchise like TB, the difference between a paycheque of 10M (for Lecavalier) and one of 7-8M (for Richards) is significant. |
| Guest4312 |
Posted - 06/30/2011 : 11:56:15
7 is less than 10 beans .... therefore money is saved. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 06/30/2011 : 11:52:14
How is Richards going to be less of a cap hit. He has been a $7+ million cap hit in his last contract, you honestly think he will take a pay cut??? You are kidding yourself. The overall contract is almost irrelevant. Lecavalier's deal is designed for a buy out later on so the actual amount paid will be closer to $55ish million.
Help me understand how signing Richards to what most people assume will be a $7+ million/year deal will be saving money?? |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 06/30/2011 : 10:01:01
quote:
If anything, I can see Tampa trying to move Lecavalier to get a very good, but legitimate 2nd line centre to reduce cap hit and have cushion after they sign Stamkos. I don't think moving Lecavalier to get Richards makes TB better and it does not save them money.
I cannot believe that Richards new contract will be more onerous or as expensive as Lecavalier's deal. Richards has already indicated that he'd take less to play there. Although I don't know what "less" is, I do know that Lecavalier has another 65M owed to him over the next 9 seasons, including 10M in each of the next 5 seasons, and a cap hit of 7.7M. Any deal with Richards would be significant savings for TB IMO - both in terms of cap relief and actual dollars spent.
In terms of production, having Stamkos and Richards down the middle vs Stamkos and Lecavalier...its arguable as to which is better, although based on past 2 years production the former is. If Lecavalier ever returned to his previous level of greatness, then thats another story.
TB is one of the few teams that have a scenario whereby acquiring Richards might be a money saver. |
| Guest4312 |
Posted - 06/30/2011 : 08:48:35
i hope he goes to buffalo.
i really like what the new ownership is doing and ryan miller and the young guys deserve a legit scoring threat which they have lacked for basically the last 10 years or more.
not sure if they have room for both erhoff and richards but that would be one lethal powerplay |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 06/30/2011 : 07:35:55
The whole Tampa Bay moving Lecavalier to get Richardsdoes make sense to me.
Consider this:
Lecavalier and Richards are similar players
Richards would not be a money savings to Tampa. In fact, he would most likely be more expensive.
If anything, I can see Tampa trying to move Lecavalier to get a very good, but legitimate 2nd line centre to reduce cap hit and have cushion after they sign Stamkos. I don't think moving Lecavalier to get Richards makes TB better and it does not save them money. |
| n/a |
Posted - 06/30/2011 : 06:26:09
I agree on Buffalo - I think they will give an offer for sure. I don't think Brad Richards will CHOOSE to go to the armpit of america, but this new Sabres owner is clearly willing to spend.
I like the possibilities for Toronto either way - to sign Richards, or maybe to get another centre from a team getting Richards - the most likely to me for that is Tampa Bay with Lecavalier.
I think Brad Richards will be with a new team by next Monday. Key among the agent statements - something I forgot to mention previously - is that Richards is looking for a STABLE hockey town. And I get that. He's been in Dallas (had unstable ownership, total non-hockey market) and Tampa Bay before that (had unstable ownership at time, total non-hockey market despite the cup there). I don't think that puts TB out of the running at this time, as their ownership has solidified, and he has a good history there; but I do think he might be looking for something different.
I think that besides Montreal, no other city can compete with Toronto for making a player feel like he is a hockey king among a hockey loving populace.
(that's with all due respect to Calgary and Edmonton, where they truly love their hockey - but the size of the city and cosmopolitan flavour is not there)
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Pasty7 |
Posted - 06/29/2011 : 21:30:37
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
I keep hearing of all the noise Buffalo plans to make. If that's the case, are they in on Richards? I'm not sure where they're at cap-wise currently, but is it possible they could have a deal in the works with another team, who perhaps isn't interested in Richards, to trade another guy to open up some space?
Lemme say it this way. Say Burke isn't interested in the price Richards will surely command. Is it possible that he may have a deal in place to aquire a guy like D. Roy if, and only if, Buffalo does sign B. Richards? Roy is only at 4mil, but it frees up some space depending on who comes the other way. It's possible other teams may have this sort of deal in place, i was just using these teams as an example.
according to B. Mac the sabres have ebnough cap room to give Richards as much as anyone else would give and do not be surprised if they do, he went on to say that if Richards is not a Sabre next season it will not be because the offer was not there it will because Richards chose not to play there
"I led the league in "Go get 'em next time." - Bob Uecker
|
| Alex116 |
Posted - 06/29/2011 : 20:35:22
I keep hearing of all the noise Buffalo plans to make. If that's the case, are they in on Richards? I'm not sure where they're at cap-wise currently, but is it possible they could have a deal in the works with another team, who perhaps isn't interested in Richards, to trade another guy to open up some space?
Lemme say it this way. Say Burke isn't interested in the price Richards will surely command. Is it possible that he may have a deal in place to aquire a guy like D. Roy if, and only if, Buffalo does sign B. Richards? Roy is only at 4mil, but it frees up some space depending on who comes the other way. It's possible other teams may have this sort of deal in place, i was just using these teams as an example. |
| n/a |
Posted - 06/29/2011 : 19:15:20
The big thing in that whoooole interview, for me, is the fact that it 100% and completely demolished the total fairytale some people were passing around . . .
. . . "Brad Richards doesn't like big hockey markets".
That is, now, seen to be total and utter bull crap.
Too bad a lot of people in the comments can't see the forest for the trees, and see that Toronto would, indeed, have a chance to win with a player of Richards' quality added to the lineup.
Lots of people seem to think that the agent is either a) trying to gear up the price with the Rangers, or b) just trying to let teams like Detroit who may not have been interested in the first place to have a look at Richards
I don't know, I am getting a little less excited about Richards now. Too much of a cir cus ring atmosphere to this now . . . price might be too high, for a guy who I still think is a bit of a risk (concussion).
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 06/29/2011 : 14:58:48
Oh I don't know, I'm sure 25 will call... although possibly only 10-12 will present offers that Richards takes seriously, and he'll pare that down to 2 or 3 to choose from.
Yah, I'd have to say that VAN, and maybe LA, might be the only teams with no room for Richards. Everyone else is fair game. |
| Guest4312 |
Posted - 06/29/2011 : 14:16:30
25 seems a bit high.... i could see anywhere from 10-12 but there are more than 5 teams that can't afford him and another 5 that he doesn't fit in based on depth at center or various other reasons |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 06/29/2011 : 12:42:00
Have a read of this article! Seems Richards' agent, Pat Morris, is expecting 25+ calls as of Friday and says it's unlikely that a decision will be made that day, but that the potential team would be pared down. He says that Richards wants to play in a "hockey market" and have "an opportunity to win" (sorry Leaf fans ) lol, j/k. If he sees the Leafs making strides in the right direction, there's no denying it's a "hockey market"!
Found it surprising that his agent said "..... there could be 29 teams calling him for Brad Richards. The Vancouver Canucks, he figures, are pretty set up the middle with Ryan Kesler and Henrik Sedin." He goes on to say that he feels Z will play with Datsyuk this year, leaving Detroit as a possible suitor?
http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/Brad-Richards-8217-criteria-8216-Hockey-mar;_ylt=AjnAwxGJt8sIQxPZSNecPqsJfwM6?urn=nhl-wp8237
|
| Oilearl |
Posted - 06/29/2011 : 11:39:03
Looking more and more like it's going to be the Rangers. Tampa would be a good choice for Richards as well and I think the goaltending there was and is more than half decent right now if you added Richards?? |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 06/29/2011 : 07:35:01
There you go again Slozo, just discredit whatever you want. You asked who was talking about Richards in Carolina other than me and I provided you the information. Does it make it right or wrong?? I don't care. You asked for something and I provided it.
Boo-ya??? Really?? |
| Pasty7 |
Posted - 06/29/2011 : 05:45:23
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
I don't think we went off topic here slozo - all the talk about Gomez only comes into play because we think they'd have to dump him, to get Lecavalier, so TB could sign Richards. Its all related! 
I see . . . that's complicated!
Funny thing is, I see an even less complicated move - Richards doesn't accept Burke's offer, and gets a great offer from Tampa Bay on the condition they can move Lecavalier - which they do, to Toronto, for an absolute steal. Then Richards signs with TB.
It's win-win for TB and Toronto, and obviously, Montreal is still there, left with Gomez.
If Yzerman CAN actually fit in Richards, I think that would actually be his first pick, IMHO. He has won a cup there; he had great success there; knows St.Louis (and Lecavalier if he is there); and it's a team that just got beat out in the third round of this year's playoffs, an up and coming contender (once they get a decent goalie).
As a Leafer, if Richards DOES decide to go to TB, I just hope Burke can be the recipient of a Lecavalier if he has to leave to make room.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
i like this plan less,,, how bout habs send Gomez to the leafs... cheap of course. we`ll take Richards and TB can stick with Vinny lol
"I led the league in "Go get 'em next time." - Bob Uecker
|
| n/a |
Posted - 06/29/2011 : 04:44:46
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
I don't think we went off topic here slozo - all the talk about Gomez only comes into play because we think they'd have to dump him, to get Lecavalier, so TB could sign Richards. Its all related!
I see . . . that's complicated!
Funny thing is, I see an even less complicated move - Richards doesn't accept Burke's offer, and gets a great offer from Tampa Bay on the condition they can move Lecavalier - which they do, to Toronto, for an absolute steal. Then Richards signs with TB.
It's win-win for TB and Toronto, and obviously, Montreal is still there, left with Gomez.
If Yzerman CAN actually fit in Richards, I think that would actually be his first pick, IMHO. He has won a cup there; he had great success there; knows St.Louis (and Lecavalier if he is there); and it's a team that just got beat out in the third round of this year's playoffs, an up and coming contender (once they get a decent goalie).
As a Leafer, if Richards DOES decide to go to TB, I just hope Burke can be the recipient of a Lecavalier if he has to leave to make room.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 06/28/2011 : 19:25:50
I don't think we went off topic here slozo - all the talk about Gomez only comes into play because we think they'd have to dump him, to get Lecavalier, so TB could sign Richards. Its all related! |
| n/a |
Posted - 06/28/2011 : 18:58:16
Let's keep it on Brad Richards, people. Focus! 
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 06/28/2011 : 10:59:47
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
quote:
Not sure any team is gonna want Vinny at 10 million for 4 more years!
TOR and MTL would both be teams that I think would be willing to take that - they are awash in money, so paying more money than the cap hit is no big deal for them (in fact it helps that the cap hit is lower than the salary), and both have a need for that player. MTL has reportedly coveted him in the past because he's additionally French Canadian, however they would have to move Gomez for sure.
The question is what goes the other way - how do you value Lecavalier? Because on one hand he's a legitimate top-line centre, but on the other, he's a salary dump by a team in cap trouble (assuming that TB would be moving Lecavalier to make room for Richards), and you know you're doing TB a favour by taking that contract.
True nuxfan, Montreal would prob still love Vinny for half a mil more than Gomez, but as you mentioned, Gomez would have to be gone for them to even think of it!! Toronto would be an interesting destination for him. Wonder if he'd find chemistry with Kessel (and vice versa)? |
| n/a |
Posted - 06/28/2011 : 09:32:48
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Well geez Slozo, I am shocked. If you google Carolina Hurricanes/Brad Richards there are two stories that come to the top of the list. Here are the links. They both refer to the same story from the Toronto Sun from Feb which are linked in both stories.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/615633-report-suggests-brad-richards-not-interested-in-toronto
http://nhlhotstove.com/five-reasons-brad-richards-would-fit-in-carolina/
If you were from Toronto, you'd know that more than half the time, Steve Simmons doesn't know what he is talking about. And he simply suggests what Richards' choices would be, including perhaps the Carolina Hurricanes. Nothing from a GM, agent, or true hockey insider, let alone from Richards himself.
So, specualtion from a sports writer not known for his insight. In February of this year, before the trade dealine.
Ahem.
Your second link?
Some guy writing about why he agrees with Steve Simmons . . . unlike any hockey insider who goes by something more tangible than "I'd like that".
And if those were your first two hits - an article from February, and a guy who agrees with that article - then that is, quite simply, nothing of note.
boo-yah.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 06/28/2011 : 09:12:41
quote:
Not sure any team is gonna want Vinny at 10 million for 4 more years!
TOR and MTL would both be teams that I think would be willing to take that - they are awash in money, so paying more money than the cap hit is no big deal for them (in fact it helps that the cap hit is lower than the salary), and both have a need for that player. MTL has reportedly coveted him in the past because he's additionally French Canadian, however they would have to move Gomez for sure.
The question is what goes the other way - how do you value Lecavalier? Because on one hand he's a legitimate top-line centre, but on the other, he's a salary dump by a team in cap trouble (assuming that TB would be moving Lecavalier to make room for Richards), and you know you're doing TB a favour by taking that contract. |
| Guest4312 |
Posted - 06/28/2011 : 08:58:00
i have been thinking the same about lecavalier for a year or so now (that he is overpayed). however, this past playoff performance you could argue he was better than stamkos |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 06/28/2011 : 08:56:35
Well geez Slozo, I am shocked. If you google Carolina Hurricanes/Brad Richards there are two stories that come to the top of the list. Here are the links. They both refer to the same story from the Toronto Sun from Feb which are linked in both stories.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/615633-report-suggests-brad-richards-not-interested-in-toronto
http://nhlhotstove.com/five-reasons-brad-richards-would-fit-in-carolina/ |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 06/28/2011 : 08:16:31
I could see his desire to return to TB, but they'd have to move a serious chunk of salary to fit him in. As in a Lecavalierian chunk!
Not sure any team is gonna want Vinny at 10 million for 4 more years! That's a contract we don't talk a lot about but at 67, 70 and just 54 this past season, we could soon be talking about Vinny's contract being in the Gomez/Horcoff/etc crippling class if he doesn't return to at least a 30-35 goal / 80pts guy? |
| n/a |
Posted - 06/28/2011 : 07:23:17
To update the latest news on Richards from the Toronto media,
Mike Zeisberger writes in the Toronto Sun that it appears to be a three team race at this point, considering cap room and need and reports: NY Rangers, Tampa Bay, and Toronto.
He reports that at this point, the Rangers seem to be the front runners, and that Tampa Bay might be right there IF they can fit him in under the cap. Toronto is obviously going to be a strong contender for his services, but the point of the article is that it looks like Toronto will really have to outbid the Rangers, and Burke isn't likely to do that if pressed to overpay or give out such a long term deal.
Of note, Pat Morris - Brad Richards' agent - is also the agent for Tim Brent of the Leafs, and currently Burke and him are in negotiations. Looks like Tim Brent is going to free agency this Friday if things stay the way they are, says Pat Morris.
Hmm, seems familiar. Whether this has any effect on the relationship between Pat Morris and Burke is hard to tell, but I would find it hard to believe Richards' name doesn't get mentioned at some point.
That's all I got right now.
Oh, and no one has mentioned Carolina except for Beans.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Leafs81 |
Posted - 06/28/2011 : 05:18:41
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
quote:
You forgot Pittsburgh (Malkin and Crosby) and LA (M. Richards and Kopitar)
Does Malkin play full-time centre in PIT? I know he plays on the wing sometimes, I wasn't sure if they'd put him at centre...however if not, PIT would be in there as well.
M. Richards, while very good, is not yet the type of centre that is a true #1 centre on any team he plays on (as is seen with LA), so I don't really consider LA to be in this group. If you do, then I'd put VAN in the same group as I see Kesler and Richards as very similar players - the second line centre that is good enough to be a top centre on about half the teams in the NHL.
Eric Staal and B Richards are both #1 centres on nearly every team they play on. Which is why I think its overkill for the most part.
Well Malkin centers the second line because they tried him with Crosby a few times but it seems to work better when they both center their respective lines. They do play together on the pp.
You are right about Kesler and M. Richards, I just thought because M. Richards was playing 1st line in Philly he was a definitive 1st line, but yeah he is comparable to Ryan Kesler. also I added LA because of the teams you named like Colorado (Stastny and Duchene) and San Jose (Thornton and Marleau) Even Marleau would be in the same category as M. Richards and Kesler. And Detroit? I'm confused with Detroit?? What positions Zetterberg and Datsyuk plays?? It says LW on their depth chart but I thought I saw Datsyuk play center and Zetterberg LW.
On another note if Colorado is there and deserves to be on that list of teams with two 1st line centers I think Philly could still be there with Brière and Giroux. Brière and Giroux are not far off from Stastny and Duchene.
I agree with you though I don't think B.Richards will go to Carolina mainly because of Eric Staal. I don't think that in the negociations Jim Rutherford will say "You will be 1st line center and our captain Eric Staal will be 2nd." So I think B.Richards will look for a team where he can center the first line and be the go to guy along with a talented winger, like Gaborik in NY or Kessel in TO.
|
| Guest9904 |
Posted - 06/27/2011 : 22:19:35
One problem with the NYR theory:
RFA's: Dubinsky, Callahan, Boyle, Anisimov, Gilroy, Sauer
UFA's: Frolov, Fedotenko, Prospal, McCabe, Eminger
Capspace: (according to capgeek/nhlnumbers) about 22-23mil left
With Ryan93 already assuming Dubinsky and Callahan are on the team, I'm assuming NYR is willing to give them the payhikes they expect/deserve.
What about the rest? They need to sign at least 3 D-men, cause they only have 4 under contract (excluding Redden )
Will there be enough to get Richards? IMO no, save for some crafty bookkeeping. |
| ryan93 |
Posted - 06/27/2011 : 18:56:31
I'm hoping it's the Rangers...would certainly make it much easier for me (Rangers are my favorite team, whatever team Brad Richards is on my 2nd favorite). My aunt was talking to his mother last week & asked which team Brad was leaning to, but she wouldn't offer any insight haha. She said they (his parents) have no idea which way he's leaning, and that Brad himself hasn't yet made up his mind yet.
With Richards on board, i think the Rangers would have to be considered contenders in the East. The two most glaring holes in their line-up are a legit #1 center, and a PP quaterback...both of which Richards would fill. The Rangers already have a young, solid core in place. Starting in goal where 29 year old Henrik Lundqvist will still be in his prime for a number of years yet, and a very solid core on defense led by Marc Staal, Dan Girardi & Ryan McDonagh. Michael Sauer is coming off a strong rookie season, and Michael Del Zotto, Tim Erixon & Dylan McIlrath are all in the system as well.
If Richards could find chemistry with Gaborik, the Rangers could have a very dangerious top line. Brandon Dubinsky played the majority of last season on the wing, but is a natural center. Derek Stepan is coming off a very strong rookie season, and could either start the season centering the 3rd line, or you could put him in the middle of Dubinsky & Callahan on the 2nd line, with Artem Anisimov centering the 3rd line & Brian Boyle the 4th. I'm interested in seeing what Matts Zuccarello can do over the course of a full season, and there's a number of quality prospects that have a shot of cracking the roster this season up front, namely Chris Kreider, Christian Thomas (Steve's son), Ryan Bourque (Ray's son), & Jesper Fasth. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 06/27/2011 : 16:21:01
quote:
You forgot Pittsburgh (Malkin and Crosby) and LA (M. Richards and Kopitar)
Does Malkin play full-time centre in PIT? I know he plays on the wing sometimes, I wasn't sure if they'd put him at centre...however if not, PIT would be in there as well.
M. Richards, while very good, is not yet the type of centre that is a true #1 centre on any team he plays on (as is seen with LA), so I don't really consider LA to be in this group. If you do, then I'd put VAN in the same group as I see Kesler and Richards as very similar players - the second line centre that is good enough to be a top centre on about half the teams in the NHL.
Eric Staal and B Richards are both #1 centres on nearly every team they play on. Which is why I think its overkill for the most part. |
|
|
