|
|
Post by Douper on Dec 18, 2007 6:02:45 GMT -5
With the injury to Morrison would there be any possibility we could dump Smolinski on the Canucks for a late pick or "future considerations"?
|
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Dec 18, 2007 7:21:13 GMT -5
He's injured too.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Dec 18, 2007 10:13:20 GMT -5
Smolinski is out for a while & I believe that although he is on a one year deal, he has a no-trade clause.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Dec 18, 2007 10:57:54 GMT -5
Too bad he doesn't have a no-suck clause. I'm disappointed in him this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Dec 18, 2007 13:07:45 GMT -5
I've said this time and time again ... the most any third line player is going to get in the "defense first" system in Montreal is 25-30 points .... thats the MOST.
Montreal's system only allows the first and second liners to be real scoresheet contributors ... the third and fourth line are basically sent out there with one instruction - don't get scored on.
Radek Bonk's (a true second line center we converted into a Selke player) BEST year with us , he had 23 points. Smoke has 11, in 28 games.
Some will call his defense into suspect .... again Radek's best year he was "even" and last year was -10. Which, when you think about it, when you are asked to go out and get shell-shocked and provide little offensive pressure yourself is pretty good. Right now Smoke is -7 (pretty bad), but he was always +1, 0, or -1 up until one month ago .... that's when they started to take him out of the role they acquired him for and started to put him with a different linemate each night on the first and second lines ... in that timeframe almost every player on the Habs took a beating in +/- . IMO, Smoke has been providing exactly what we acquired him for ..
Now I am not a big fan of the +/- stat .... but some are, and well when you look at it you have to look at more than just the -7.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 18, 2007 13:34:47 GMT -5
IMO, Smoke has been providing exactly what we acquired him for .. Bonk was let go in favor of Smolinski because Smoke was supposed to be more versatile and help provide more offense on lower lines 5 on 5. This has not happen at all (though I agree that the defense-only philosophy is the real problem) quite the opposite. Smolinski is on par for his worst year while Bonk's offense has magically returned to him once away from Montreal. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Dec 19, 2007 7:22:09 GMT -5
IMO, Smoke has been providing exactly what we acquired him for .. Bonk was let go in favor of Smolinski because Smoke was supposed to be more versatile and help provide more offense on lower lines 5 on 5. This has not happen at all (though I agree that the defense-only philosophy is the real problem) quite the opposite. Smolinski is on par for his worst year while Bonk's offense has magically returned to him once away from Montreal. Not sure if I'd say his offense has magically returned. His goal production has for sure. Right now he has 10 goals and 3 assists for only 13 points. Still on pace to match his Montreal production on a per game basis. Montreal has a habit of acquiring good all-"round" players and then ruining them by trying to place them in square holes. |
|
