• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

TML? More like FML, amirite? Yet Another Off Season Thread

Yeah he's probably more Carlson. Wish he had his point shot for the PP. Great player and I'm not saying you can't win with him. It's just a shame that they have to hide him so much. And Tampa was clearly targeting him all series. Every time Rielly was put on the ice for spot duty on the ozone, Tampa raced to put Kucherov on if they could get the puck out of the zone. It's just unfortunate that he has to be managed so actively.
 
Preston said:
Thing is his xga with Brodie (getting secondary matchups) was pretty shit too. So you put him with a Brodie as a babysitter and waste away the opportunity of putting together a legit shutdown pair or you put him with a shitty third pair D and shelter him to shit while getting him offensive looks/ozone starts with other d throughout the game. I think I prefer the latter because Muzz-Brodie was the most stable, solid shutdown pair I've seen on this team... Maybe since the 90s.
Click to expand...

Is there not an in between here though? Like him with Lyubushkin doesn't actually make any sense to me, it neuters the best part of Rielly, no?
 
Preston said:
I've always had a love-hate thing with him. He brings value and is a huge, huge net positive, but the dude is a liability at times. I don't know if 7.5m dollars makes sense for a guy that you can't trust in certain situations. They had him on the third pair in the playoffs this year, while getting spot duty in offensive situations and he was still often exposed. Do you really want to spend 7.5 on a guy that you need to hide? I think you can find a guy that does that for cheaper... Definitely not as well (he's a fucking phenomenal offensive driver), but I'd prefer a top 4 that is more well-rounded in a perfect world.

You'd still need to replace him though. They'd be very weak offensively back there if you unload him. And he has a full NMC so it ain't happening anyway.
Click to expand...
yeah. well as I said in his contract thread I didn't like it but was resigned to its inevitability. they weren't doing anything but locking this guy up for life even though we've done nothing but lose with him as a "#1".

the money is just high enough to be a problem because he can't handle tough minutes. if he could be used as a real top pair dman there would be no problem. Instead we sit around and complain about who he plays with every year.

and yeah unfortunately they're weak offensively as a blueline even WITH Rielly. Replacing him with another defence only player would be inadvisable even if management were willing to trade this player(which they're not). you lose too much with your offence from a rushing standpoint.
 
hockeylover said:
Is there not an in between here though? Like him with Lyubushkin doesn't actually make any sense to me, it neuters the best part of Rielly, no?
Click to expand...
Yeah of course. The boosh stuff was dumb. I still think he's best suited for 3rd pair though. His xga with literally everyone has been poor. But he more than makes up for it with his offensive driving ability so the xgf% is adequate. He just struggles a bit more defensively against teams with depth. Even when they sheltered him vs Tampa he labored a bit back there because they ran 4 lines with legit offensive ability. It's hard to completely hide him against some teams.
 
Preston said:
If you decide to go the trade route for a goalie the 1st is the obvious trade bait. But if that's the direction you take you better be sure. If they go with Varly-Jack for a combined 8.5-9m next year does anyone complain? Me personally, I'd be skeptical and concerned especially if they trade the 1st for Varlamov, but I'm always skeptical with goaltending. I also don't trust Isles goalie stats. He was wildly inconsistent with the Avs. But... At least they'd have a real, legit platoon. That has to be a big upgrade on Jack-Pete.
Click to expand...
No trading 1sts for older goalies.

Draft a goalie with it instead.
 
Preston said:
I think this is the year they veer from their prior methods on goaltending. Don't think they'll be too aggressive elsewhere on the roster but I have a feeling they might go big-ish game hunting on goaltending. A slightly retained John Gibson might be another, ballsier option. Can't take on that full contract though. If you get him at a good AAV, he could be an option as a platoon guy with Jack or whoever. He has shown in the past that he has Vas-like superstar/heater abilities. It has been awhile though and idk what's up with him or whether it has been injuries or chronic issues that has held him back since.
Click to expand...
I think Dubas believes in Jack and saw that scoring is our issue. If he didn’t, he’s a dummy like most of the rest here. It’ll be more of the same, but the obvious pieces (Muzz, Kerf, Mrazek) being moved and replaced.
 
Volcanologist said:
I find this sudden reversal on Rielly around here fascinating. even zeke(?!) I've never been a fan as you guys know, but I'm curious to know what turned it.
Click to expand...

Not doing any 180 here.

Rielly is still our best dman overall, and really i dont actually want to move and Dman.

but there's a few interesting factors here:

1. Our blueline is better than its ever been.
2. He's not the guy you want facing the toughs.
3. He makes $7.5 longterm.
4. Our kids Sandin Liljegren Niemela are all skilled guys that would be much easier to break in behind a dependable matchup pair to take all the toughs AND all of whom you want getting PP time.

But again I want to keep this D together for now.
 
The Rielly betrayal, sheesh.

I didn’t see any defensive issues with him during the series, and he was handcuffed to a donkey for all of it against the best team in the east.

D was not our problem. Say it with me. D is never our problem.
 
zeke said:
Not doing any 180 here.

Rielly is still our best dman overall, and really i dont actually want to move and Dman.

but there's a few interesting factors here:

1. Our blueline is better than its ever been.
2. He's not the guy you want facing the toughs.
3. He makes $7.5 longterm.
4. Our kids Sandin Liljegren Niemela are all skilled guys that would be much easier to break in behind a dependable matchup pair to take all the toughs AND all of whom you want getting PP time.

But again I want to keep this D together for now.
Click to expand...
Holy underrated and unappreciated, Batman.
 
zeke said:
Not doing any 180 here.

Rielly is still our best dman overall, and really i dont actually want to move and Dman.

but there's a few interesting factors here:

1. Our blueline is better than its ever been.
2. He's not the guy you want facing the toughs.
3. He makes $7.5 longterm.
4. Our kids Sandin Liljegren Niemela are all skilled guys that would be much easier to break in behind a dependable matchup pair to take all the toughs AND all of whom you want getting PP time.

But again I want to keep this D together for now.
Click to expand...

hmm. I'm not sure Dubas agrees with you, since he was hot after Lindholm at the deadline. that kind of acquisition would absolutely mean salary being moved out on the blueline to make room. he's clearly interested in adding another 2-way top 4 veteran dman under 30. which is a wise move as Muzzin/Brodie are getting older and also don't contribute much offence.

also on point 4 I don't think the coach we have is interested in playing kids. you probably need to forget that one.
 
Volcanologist said:
hmm. I'm not sure Dubas agrees with you, since he was hot after Lindholm at the deadline. that kind of acquisition would absolutely mean salary being moved out on the blueline to make room. he's clearly interested in adding another 2-way top 4 veteran dman under 30. which is a wise move as Muzzin/Brodie are getting older and also don't contribute much offence.

also on point 4 I don't think the coach we have is interested in playing kids. you probably need to forget that one.
Click to expand...

As usual you're stretching the facts to the limit here.

Showing interest in a trade deadline target means only that. He's felt no need to extend other trade deadline targets.

And Sandin and Lilly played a lot this year.
 
Yeah he had interest in extending Gio for $1m. That's the extent of it. Boston blew every other offer out of the water BECAUSE it was conditional on him extending there. Leafs just wanted a rental.
 
I mean I'm sure he would have explored signing Lindholm which could have ended up meaning moving Muzzin (more a move to get younger/healthier than better tho) but the main thing was getting an upgrade for this season
 
zeke said:
As usual you're stretching the facts to the limit here.

Showing interest in a trade deadline target means only that. He's felt no need to extend other trade deadline targets.
Click to expand...

that kind of player would have to be extended. Lindholm wouldn't have been a rental

And Sandin and Lilly played a lot this year.
Click to expand...

yeah they totally won't be behind a boosh or polak type again next playoff with the same coach. I can feel it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top