Calling Jensen better than Biggs is laughable. You have literally zero basis from which to form that opinion. Neither are NHLers right now, Biggs was drafted 7 spots higher, and they've put up basically identical OHL stats. You really have a problem with overvaluing Vancouver Canuck players.
Is it? Because two posts earlier, you said this:
Jensen > Biggs
(Shouldn't have to explain those two, pretty obvious)
So which one is it?
For me Jensen > Biggs. Jensen is playing against Men, You say Biggs is equaling Jensen stats identically, but what u don't take into account is that those are Jensen's old stats. He has improved alot more, infact he's playing in a higher level of hockey, and for how bad his team is, he's not doing that bad.
I would say Jensen > Biggs.
Biggs is mean, and tough kind of like Kassian but less offensive upside IMO, he has offensive skill yes, but not as much as Jensen, they are both big size wise, Biggs is tough around the net, that's where he is most effective offensively. He has leadership yes, he needs to work on his acceleration, and though he is tough he needs to work on his defensive play. Biggs is prjected to be a 2nd/3rd PWF, but I would lean a bit closer the 2nd line.
Jensen offensive skill is really something, a great wrist shot. He has higher upside than Biggs IMO. He skates well, he has hands, good vision, a classic finisher and skates well for his size. Needs to work on defensive play and consistentcy. Projects to be a 1st/2nd line forward, or you could say lower tier 1st line forward.
I think it is a matter of preference, I take Jensen because to be able to get that size, with that scoring ability doesn't happen all that often, and he has really taken off, more than Biggs has since the draft IMO. I see the upside as greater.
Even calling Hodgson better than Kadri is premature. Give Kadri a full year in the NHL first. Kadri had better AHL numbers than Hodgson did in 2010-11.
I have been defending Kadri, as you know you have been too.
Hodgson is better than Kadri right now, that's what I was getting at. I'm sure most people would choose Hodgson since Kadri is a question mark but who knows long term. If I had to pick right now I would take Coho.
As for Lu/Lecvavalier, the problem is that there simply aren't many teams that are in the market for a goalie. You can't counter that fundamental reality with any sort of statistic. Supply/demand will always trump all. Demand is low. That carries consequences.
That's not what we were arguing about, we were arguing about Lu vs Lecavalier, and It's clear Lu has more value.
Your kinda sidetracking.
A tandem is a stunningly foolish idea that I've explained many times. In short, one will invariably outplay the other, leaving one as the starter and one as the backup. Whoever's the backup suddenly has very little value, and we still have > $9M invested in goaltenders. Utterly foolish.
No that didn't happen last year did it? Both goalies still are at the same skill level, I don't see why it would happen this year.
It's a stuningly foolish idea to hang roberto out to dry as the back-up because then his value will go down, if he comes in and the time is split equally he will be able to play alot and play at a good level, and will retain value, and will probably get himself moved sooner since MG isn't giving him away.
Reimer was injured. This wasn't a Ryan Kesler, I-had-a-bad-year-so-I'll-tell-everyone-I-was-injured situation, he only played in 34 games. If Burke acquires Luongo, he's effectively given up on Reimer. Which might happen, but my point is that he's really not under that much pressure to do so, because a reasonable case can be made to try out Reimer some more.
He wasn't injured if he only played 34 games, he got injured, rested enough so that he was 100% when he got back (unlike Kesler) and that's proven by his low GP total.
Then he came back and wasn't what everyone thaught, he stepped into a situation where they needed him and he failed. He's not the guy they need to hang there playoff hopes on.
And as for Daly, yes it does matter. What it tells you is that the lifetime contracts are what the owners are "willing to die on a hill" to avoid. What kind of signal does that give you as to what the sort of demand for Luongo will be, around the league, knowing that they're desperately wanting to get rid of the lifetime contract? Think about it.
Yes in the future, it still doesn't make much sense, how this effects Lu. We are the one's who are ultimately going to be punished for the contract. No one else, why does it matter? I don't see a reason honestly. They want Lu cause of his ability, the contract isn't the greatest but there are options. And anything that happens with future contracts really doesn't affect this. Either way it is the owner's message because they were the one's stupid enough to sign those contracts. Not the GM's, if they see Lu as something they want/need they will still go after him.
U need to explain this better I don't see how it affects Lu, or anyone with one of these contracts for that matter.