Wednesday, July 02, 2008

Nossa


So I guess Detroit saw Hossa good, huh?
Actually the crux of this deal is that Hossa saw the Wings good.
And we may do this all again next summer.
Considering how often athletes say they want to win but then take the money and run I admire Hossa for this move. He wants to win and he signed with the team that has the best chance to do so.
As for all of the whining that has already started about UFAs not coming to Edmonton, just please stop once and for all. This is about one thing only. Hossa wants to get his name on the Stanley Cup. He will get his big payout next summer. It may be with the Oilers. Maybe not.
Guy wants to win and he has all the money he will ever need already. Good for him.
Now, Kevin, lets not settle for any of the other quacks out there, alright? This guy was THE elite difference maker out there. No need to bid for Huselius to make a splash.
Lets shore up Pisani's line and then we're done.

12 comments:

heed said...

here...here...

HBomb said...

Two options:

1) Two years of Jagr

OR

2) A tough veteran C (NOT Reasoner), a stay at home D and some sort of enforcer.....

Either way, I'd be happy.

Vic Ferrari said...

Well said, Pat.

I'm happy if Lowe stands Pat with a couple of relatively small additions (solid veteran Dman and two-way centre). But I'm less worried about him running at a Huselius type now than I was a few weeks ago.

And I wouldn't mind Lowe adding another less famous difference maker up front (from the Cole tree of players), just to give the kids a better shot at continuing to progress this season, and to give the Oilers some more credibility for next summer's UFA season.

And of course a Horcoff extension should be close to the top of the to-do list by now.

namflashback said...

Echoed. Adding Hossa was a swing for the fences to make 08-09 a "go-for-it" year, but their fundamental improvements should have them knocking the door into the playoffs.

Keep the mid-term plan the same as it was. Stay-on-target.

Black Dog said...

Thanks Vic.

I wonder how Lowe sees this roster.

Duhatschek suggests:

Penner/Horcoff/Hemsky
Cole/Gagner/Nilsson

Which would mean Cogliano and Pisani and ????

Does Cogliano play the wing in this situation?

Or does Cole play with Pisani?

I'd like another veteran Dman as well although I don't want him to blow his brains out over it.

How about a guy like Pascal Dupuis up front?

Regarding Horcoff Katz called him yesterday apparently to shoot the shit, so I would think that bodes well. The Langkow contract is comparable to what he would get and that is reasonable to me.

namflashback said...

A Horcoff - Katz conversation does bode well too. That's an important step for the owner to take with a guy that the players in the room really see as a leader (he is not underrated by his teammates) and that it was probably part of understanding whether or not Hossa would be signable. Getting Hossa and sacrificing Horcoff would not have been an improvement.

Boondock said...

Chicago has to move about $5 mil and Tallon mentioned to one of the TSN guys during their coverage that he will most likely keep both goalies.

Havlat has 1 year left at $6M, and would allow KLo to add a big difference maker up front and still blow his wad in Hossa's direction next summer.

Jonathan said...

LT quoted a Barnes article today that says Lowe has made a 1yr/7M offer to Jagr and also offered Le GG a contract.

Black Dog said...

Yeah I just read that.

Perfect really. LeGG as the nuclear deterrent and the one year deal to Jagr.

More impressive to me - its Jagr and then they go with with they have. No dummy offers. I wouldn't mind Fedotenko to shore up Pisani's line but I'm not complaining.

namflashback said...

Now, Kevin, lets not settle for any of the other quacks out there, alright? This guy was THE elite difference maker out there. No need to bid for Huselius to make a splash.

Geez, Pat -- It's like Lowe's in your head.

Black Dog said...

That would explain the voices.

Anonymous said...

It would if they're talking about 'the one that got away' or using my least favourite speech tick: 'Ummm...yeah...no,' and then the answer to the question. That drives me effing nuts.