Stargazing: Continued Speculation on Defensive Help
There seems to be some difference of opinion out there on the internets as to whether or not the Stars had interest in Tomas Kaberle. Joe Nieuwendyk let it be known on Sunday afternoon that he would not be making a trade for Kaberle, but does that necessarily mean he wasn't interested in Kaberle before. Erroneous, disreputable places on the web variously suggest that the Stars were the team that offered a player and a pick to Toronto, but the pick would come back contingent on Kaberle signing an extension or not.
Is that true? There's no way to know. It makes sense that if the Stars were interested they would seek a guarantee of extension. The argument against trading for Kaberle (or, really, any defenseman who is for some reason "available") is 'why give up players and/or prospects for a one year rental?', particularly when you're in a semi-rebuilding mode?
This isn't just a Kaberle story. It's part of the continuing (hopefully just beginning) saga of how GM Joe intends to build a competent blue line in Dallas. Defensemen are at a premium right now in the league. They're seen as a risk in the draft, because their development takes longer, traditionally. So when one finally matures and grows into a role on a team, they lock him up. They are a precious commodity.
Even if the Stars are sold tomorrow and the new owner says (unlikely) "Here's some cash, let's get up to the cap right away!!", the Stars still wouldn't have any no-brainer, easy deals to make for d-men. It's a position that is largely being furnished through farm systems throughout the league. Not free agency. That's not to say it can't be done, but it's going to be dearly expensive if it happens that way.

- We Start with Mike Heika having a similar discussion. Bieksa can be had, perhaps, but Vancouver can't take back salary and you'd have to lose someone young (or picks) for what could be a rental. This same scenario is going to come up a lot before the blue line is fixed.
- The official site has Crawford and friends defending the new system. Hard to argue as the goal against were just as bad the year before last.
- Speaking of Crawford, he's been spending some time in Cornwall, ON evidently.
- Mark Stepneski takes a look at the Stars defense, sure to be the same on opening night as it was last season. Good read, though.
- 20 year old Jace Coyle was signed by the Stars this summer as an un-drafted free agent, and now has a nice feature on himself in the "Cranbrook Daily Townsman." If you only click on one of these links, make it this one.
- And finally, a google-newing of Tom Hicks will find you articles entitled: "Livepool Refuses to Rush Sales Process" and "Livepool FC looking to Find New Ownership as quickly as possible."...You've gotta love the internet.
21 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This is interesting...
They’re actually trying new things at the development camp….
http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/stars
I wonder if any of it will pan out. Some of the ideas sound pretty good to me. Any way we can get someone up there to see it in person? I’m not sure where Art lives or anything, but he’d probably be closest…
I dunno if it's a restricted thing or not...
but that would be awesome to have a personal POV on it.
I dunno, maybe I’m just really starved for the hockey season to start too, lol
I think the idea about
no icing on the PK is terrible. Same thing with no line changes on offsides and moving the faceoff to the other zone….same thing with the side changes in overtime.
Do we really want to see teams scoring because the quality of play on the other side has diminished greatly due to fatigue? I mean, they’re talking about increasing scoring by severely degrading the quality of the game, right?
Obviously those changes are all a long shot and unlikely. Though, I do think we’ll get to no touch icing in the next 5 years.
I like the idea of no touch icing, for sure...
And I’m kind of partial to the no icing on the PK too… it would force D to be a little smarter with the puck. It may even spark more SHGs, who knows. Changing the whole offsides thing though… I dunno about that.
The greatest thing I think is that they are at least looking at a ton of different ways to fix the overtime. Though the easiest would be just to eliminate the loser point, or complicate standings by going with a 3 pt system. (3 for Reg win, 2 for ot win, 1 for OTL)
I dunno, I'm kinda for no icing the puck on the PK.
It’s kind of silly to let a team break the rules because they broke the rules.
I hate the idea of no icing on the PK.
It’s a cheap way for the NHL to gain more American viewers. More goals, more attraction for the US, even though the teams would hate it. Unfortunately I think it’ll get done…
DefendingBigD: A Dallas Stars Blog
The Maneater: The Mizzou Student Newspaper I cover women's soccer and other sportsy stuff.
by Pat Iversen on Aug 17, 2010 12:08 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
No icing on the PK would kill us.
I don’t like rules unless they benefit my teams, and I don’t think that one would.
Here's to all us girls who love hockey...and the men who play it.
by Brad_Richards_Rocks on Aug 17, 2010 2:14 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
a crazy idea from razor?
Ive heard razor mention an idea of completely eliminating icing. He has alot of whacky ideas but I think this would at least be worth a trial. Whats icing really other than an opportunity to blow a whistle? Make the goalie show some skill and play the damn puck to get it back up the ice.
I could see that working...
I’m of the opinion that it either needs to be icing all the time, or none at all. They can’t keep doing this sometimes it’s called but not all the time, stuff.
Except they do that with regular penalties in the playoffs, so I don’t know if my argument really has any basis.
a crazy idea from razor?
Ive heard razor mention an idea of completely eliminating icing. He has alot of whacky ideas but I think this would at least be worth a trial. Whats icing really other than an opportunity to blow a whistle? Make the goalie show some skill and play the damn puck to get it back up the ice.
How about
We keep the ability to ice the puck on the PK but make the PK (with line changes) stay out there for the whole 2 minutes no matter how many times they’re scored on? That was one from Razor that always made sense to me. I’m not sure if I like it or not, but it makes sense.
Biggest issue is that it becomes even MORE of a special teams game than it is now.
That's the difficult part...
How do you open up the game without causing more penalties or stoppage in play? The only thing I can think of is widening the blue lines, and moving the face off dots…
The main problem I can see with no icing on the PK...
…is more people getting away with more uncalled penalties, and being able to either goad their opposition into taking one (which means there’s at least a 30% chance they’ll be scored on), or get away with it because the other team’s too scared of the consequences.
Which means that when you do have someone decide that enough is enough, and it’s time to stand up for his team, he’s more likely to make a more dangerous play — if he tries to fight the antagonist (henceforth referred to as “Avery”), Avery could very well just hide and turtle up and give his team a five-minute major penalty (or, basically, an instant goal), so it almost makes more sense to just make a huge, borderline hit with the notion of knocking Avery out of the game; he’ll get the message and you get “bang for your buck” — one player gets what he deserves, thus preventing him from interfering with your guys anymore, and you may give up a goal.
In principle, I think it’s a fine idea. In practice, when you look at the results of things like the instigator rule, and so on, it’s probably a step in the wrong direction.
Not all that different
From lacrosse, is it? Plenty of games are 12 to 10 and it doesn’t really take away from it.
Only thing is that it really kills the absolute best part of the game for me- Game 7 triple OT hockey. There isn’t anything like it.
If they really want to increase scoring
then get rid of offsides lol talk about opening up the ice and keeping the game flowing. I wold love that
GET OFF NIEUWENDYK'S NUTS
Cherry picking would be too big of an issue.
There’s no excitement in one person standing away from the play waiting for a puck to come to him.
all you have to do is change your strategy
inline is played without offsides and their pro divisions has none of that. its just one of the defenders responisiblity to keep track of where he is, or if your playing man to man then one of your offense will pick him up. the passing is so much more open and the pace from defense to breakout is much more up tempo then with offsides. dump and chase style is the reason alot of non hockey lovers get bored of hockey. I love all hockey and understand the strategy behind it but to the causual observer (who most of have no idea what offsides is) the dump and chase is monotonous and boring. I know this wont ever happen I just want someone to test it with a high level of ice hockey and see how it translates over
GET OFF NIEUWENDYK'S NUTS
Totally agree
I have played in leagues that don’t have off sides and cherry pickers suck and the goals they score really do require any real talent. But I could see non hockey fans liking that, as for me the rules should not change anytime soon.



















