Samifan Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2015/02/03/report-flyers-talking-new-deal-with-schultz-expected-to-qualify-del-zotto/related/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 The thing I've heard about Schultz (on my couch - I have no "sources") is that they are seeing what he might be interested in re-signing for and if it is too high, he's likely to be turned into a draft pick. I like his play this year, but I still don't see him as more than a #7 - which is the role he has played well. And #7s just aren't all that expensive (or particularly hard to find IMO). MDZ is gonna get qualified and, assuming he doesn't wreck his career by demanding arbitration, he might get a little bridge deal into a year or two of UFAdom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 As well as Schultz has played this year I would prefer to see him traded at the deadline. I just don't see him as a key piece going forward. MDZ I definitely hope they keep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropicalFruitGirl26 Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Del Zotto, despite the issues, and if his contract demands don't border on 'absurd', still has upside as a 24 year old, fine skating, risk taking, puck moving defenseman.If I am Philly, I am definitely seeing how he could fit in. Nick Schultz?I will just say what I've ALWAYS said about him: he is standard.6'0 200 lbs, neither overly defensive or offensively oriented, relatively quiet, run-of-the-mill, generic, somewhat checking defenseman. I suppose if a deal is reasonable he can stay on as well, but as was already pointed out....extra and bottom pair defensemen are not that hard to find in the NHL, and perhaps Philly would do better to look at the off season situation and see if there are any other D-men who not only may be younger but could represent more upside than Schultz, and that could be had for a reasonable amount also. With Schultz, you already know what you are going to get...nothing more, nothing less. If Philly is ok with that, then great....but I get the feeling it may be worth looking at perhaps some others like an Adam McQuaid, 28, $1.8 M....Anton Volchenkov, 33, $1M....or a Nate Prosser (whom I hope the Wild actually keep), 29, $700K. Any of those three represent significant upside in terms of toughness, some shut down play, and even some positional value over Nick Schultz, while probably being around his price tag.NONE of those guys are anything near top level D-men, mind you, and perhaps Nick Schultz may be better rated slightly in some areas over them, but I believe any of those three, healthy are more than just the ol 'standard', and where they lack, they make up for in other areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briere48 Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 i think having a smaller defense makes this team better because they are mobile, that's the issue with coburn, schenn, mcdud is that they are not mobile because of their size. if you look at the really good teams, they dont have alot of big d men accept for tampa with hedman. it's the one the reasons why this d is playing good is because they are not big. that's the issue i have with berube that he pefers big dmen which i dont like, it's hurting us more which the reason why are not playing well when those guys like coburn and mcdud were playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Del Zotto, despite the issues, and if his contract demands don't border on 'absurd', still has upside as a 24 year old, fine skating, risk taking, puck moving defenseman. As an RFA, MDZ can have no contract "demands." He can have "wants" and he can have a qualifying offer of $1.3M. Or he can file for arbitration. And we all know how much GMs LOVE guys who are trying to reclaim their careers at 24 25 filing for arbitration. I'm with Brelic's opinion on the MDZ thread - he'll be offered a 2-3 year deal at around $3M, more or less pending length. And he'd be WISE to take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropicalFruitGirl26 Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 As an RFA, MDZ can have no contract "demands." He can have "wants" and he can have a qualifying offer of $1.3M. Or he can file for arbitration. And we all know how much GMs LOVE guys who are trying to reclaim their careers at 24 25 filing for arbitration. I'm with Brelic's opinion on the MDZ thread - he'll be offered a 2-3 year deal at around $3M, more or less pending length. And he'd be WISE to take it. Ahh, I see.....my bad then....I did some checking around on defenseman's salary numbers and failed to see where MDZ was still an RFA.Big difference in that case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adamflyers Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 If Shultz is not looking for some ridiculous contract amount and he will accept what a player of his caliber is worth, I say keep him. He is a good 6th d-man. Considering the years he have had to put up with the likes of Parent, Krycek and one other who alludes me, I will take a solid 6th d-man all day long. They are not a dime a dozen IMO. If he wants money more than he is worth hopefully Hexy trades him and doesn't ask Homer for advice, or else we could be looking at a 5 year 10 Million contract! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 i think having a smaller defense makes this team better because they are mobile, that's the issue with coburn, schenn, mcdud is that they are not mobile because of their size. if you look at the really good teams, they dont have alot of big d men accept for tampa with hedman. it's the one the reasons why this d is playing good is because they are not big. that's the issue i have with berube that he pefers big dmen which i dont like, it's hurting us more which the reason why are not playing well when those guys like coburn and mcdud were playing.I think the Internet just broke with this post... My lord... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briere48 Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 I think the Internet just broke with this post... My lord... why are you always trolling my posts? can you at least provide on opinion on my post that's hockey related instead of flaming? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 @briere48 I promise I'm not posting this here as well to pick on you. This is actually the thread I *thought* I was replying to when I posted this in the other one. It's more relevant here. I did this because I thought the size assertion may be plausible. I just randomly took the top teams in the league and took averages of their age, height and weight to compare against the Flyers. I also, for giggles, took the same for Buffalo and Edmonton because they suck. Just to see if there was appreciable difference. Height is in inches, weight in pounds. I'll let you all be the judge: I was curious, so I went through top pairs of the above teams.Average height: 74.25Average weight: 210.45 Flyers top pair height: 74Flyers top pair weight: 205.5(top pair used was Coburn & Streit. YMMV) The Flyers' height and weight don't really stand out. Fairly average.Their age, however, is higher than everyone on the chart except Montreal. And a lot higher than everyone else except Chicago.Maybe the Flyers' defense isn't too big or too small or too North American. Maybe they're a little too old (average didn't even include Timo) and simply not good enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 that's the issue with coburn, schenn, mcdud is that they are not mobile because of their size. Their size has little to nothing to do with why they aren't mobile. You can be above 6 feet and still skate.They just don't. Why? That's a different discussion. Schenn and MacDonald aren't really any bigger than Brown on the Kings or Keith on the Blackhawks. Weber and Jones are both about as big as Coburn. It's not size. It's what he's doing with it (or lack thereof). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropicalFruitGirl26 Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 The NHL is all about big mobile defensemen.....if someone is smaller and can play, then they will still have a job, but size is ALWAYS preferred, especially on D....and these days, big mobile guys are becoming more frequent. The thing one has to look beyond simple size and speed however, is smarts....at least being able to read a fast NHL level play develop and position accordingly.Now, the combination of speed, size, smarts, reaction, AND positional awareness.......there is combo that is hard to find, and when it is found, a team usually has to pay a pretty premium for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 why are you always trolling my posts? can you at least provide on opinion on my post that's hockey related instead of flaming? toughfighter, come on this is surely not trolling. I am merely making an observation based on what you wrote. I think it is a ridiculous statement that our (paraphrasing here) defense is bad b/c we have bigger defensemen. You can be big and fleet of foot on skates. So, in a few years you would like to have 6 Gost's type players on the back end? That would be the easiest defense to play against in the league... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 @murraycraven DRAFT THIS GUY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyClarkeFan16 Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 i think having a smaller defense makes this team better because they are mobile, that's the issue with coburn, schenn, mcdud is that they are not mobile because of their size. if you look at the really good teams, they dont have alot of big d men accept for tampa with hedman. it's the one the reasons why this d is playing good is because they are not big. that's the issue i have with berube that he pefers big dmen which i dont like, it's hurting us more which the reason why are not playing well when those guys like coburn and mcdud were playing. You do know that Coburn is one of the best skating defensemen in the game, right? He's 6'5, but he's incredibly mobile. If there's one thing he can do, it's skate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briere48 Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 You do know that Coburn is one of the best skating defensemen in the game, right? He's 6'5, but he's incredibly mobile. If there's one thing he can do, it's skate.aactually he's bad as derrian hatcher and mike rathje. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 actually he's bad as derrian hatcher and mike rathje. Well, that simply isn't true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 actually he's bad as derrian hatcher and mike rathje. Actually, no he isn't. Coburn can skate...and very well for a guy his size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 Actually, no he isn't. Coburn can skate...and very well for a guy his size. Hatcher wasn't all that bad himself. Injuries slowed him down but his positioning and hockey IQ were excellent. I want more mobile d-men on the Flyers as much (if not more) than the next guy, but all the mobility in the world can't make up for knowing how to read the play and get in position. I would take a reasonably healthy Hatcher in or near his prime over Coburn probably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briere48 Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 Well, that simply isn't true. so if a good offer came along for coburn, you dont want him gone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 actually he's bad as derrian hatcher and mike rathje. complete farce... you can hate all you want but to say Coburn is not a good skater really deflates your hockey IQ around these parts. If there is one thing Coburn can do well it is skate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 so if a good offer came along for coburn, you dont want him gone? That's a bait and switch argument and not at all what was said. You can't get to the above conclusion based on the exchange. You said Coburn was as bad as Hatcher and Rathje, specifically regarding quickness. That was a completely untrue statement completely devoid of reality. The only way to get from that to "so if a good offer came along for Cobrun, you don't want him gone?" is to be intellectually dishonest and simply moving the goalposts on ridiculous statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 so if a good offer came along for coburn, you dont want him gone? where did ANYONE say that? People were rebutting you comment about Coburn not being a good skater - he actually is a very good skater. I think everyone on this board thinks Coburn should be packaged at the deadline. to borrow a phrase from radoruxpin - read the posts Francis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.