Pavel Bure wrote:
mikey287 wrote:Was watching the Buffalo/Winnipeg game, thought, "hmm, Tangradi is out there a lot it seems..."
At this point in the tilt, no Jet forward has more even strength ice time than Eric Tangradi.
Not saying anything about that, just saying it because I'm not sure how much I'll ever get to say that...also add that to the "better than Ryan Stone" list. Oh Generation X...
Do you think the Jets are going to give him the Chris Bourque treatment and if nothing surfaces cut bait at the end of the season?
When you bring in a younger guy, a younger project like Tangradi and you're a team that really only hopes to be average this season, you give him a shot. It's worth a try. You're still in the "honeymoon" period in Winnipeg, so the fans won't be too unhappy with a loser quite yet, you have some roster turnover coming up probably, and you have a lot of room to tinker.
So, you put Tangradi in a role and evaluate him. Kevin Cheveldayoff and his trusted companions are looking at #27 every night...they don't care about 15 points in 17 games or 2 points in 12 or anything like that...they just want to see if that's a kid that a) has potential to be a Winnipeg Jet b) is an upgrade over the current core of players c) who, if anyone, he makes expendable at the deadline/offseason
It's good methodology for a team like Winnipeg. Look right now, Redmond and Postma are up there and you look at those guys and you go, "ok, Postma can skate really well, he's fitting in nicely...I think we can move on from Ron Hainsey..." or maybe you take calls from another team that likes Postma even more and you use him to fill another role...if the staff doesn't believe in a player, you're looking at your pro scouts and going, "ok, look, this stick figure Postma isn't cutting it" or "this sack of dog vomit Tangradi isn't gonna make us better, Christ, he's slower than Antropov" so you add it to the organizational "wish list" for the deadline or the offseason.
Look at Columbus, they lost Rick Nash. We knew that was happening, somehow, some way. Look at the underrated acquisition they made...there aren't a lot of power forwards out there, but how about swapping Marc Methot for Nick Foligno. Identifying a future weakness - a big body that can win board battles, he has skill, he plays both ways, he's in your face...sure he doesn't have Nash's skill set, that's hard to match, I mean, if he had Nash's skill he wouldn't be acquirable...they auditioned some guys like David Savard last year, they felt they could get defense out of him, physicality can be found in a dime store bin, it was a good move by them. They got a look at what was coming, they were impressed by it, they can start moving forward...
If I'm Ottawa, I'm probably gonna start doing the same thing. System audit. Weircioch, Boroweicki, get those guys involved more, see what you have...down the middle, maybe you're looking at Colin Greening, what does Zack Smith do in increased minutes, how about Kyle Turris as a #1 center...
It's tough when you're a team in a window to contend, but sometimes you just need that time to take a minute and find out exactly what you have...and when you can't, sometimes you lose it for nothing, like the Wings have done over the years...such a deep team, that sometimes it's almost to a fault...Tomas Kopecky could never really break in with them, Quincey was lost on waivers and then re-acquired, Matthias is starting to blossom in Florida, Ritola was lost on waivers (no big deal I suppose), Hudler got a decent look and left...alright not big names, but maybe you didn't have to use a 2nd round pick to add a depth winger because you had Kopecky this whole time. Hell, they used a 1st round pick just to get Kyle Quincey back after drafting him in the 4th round and losing him on waivers. Now, obviously, that's a successful team and I'm not knocking what they've done at all, but sometimes it helps if you can take a minute and go, "ok, this is what we have..."