Congrats on the new owners-I am tipping a Molson Brador as a write!

BTW im from Montreal, DONT TAKE KOMISAREK, PLEASE DONT, HE SUCKS I SWEAR HE DOES, HE IS WORSE THAN EXELBY WITH ONE LEG OUT

But Zanon is a great choice, Scuderi is nice and Afinogenov is so underrated. I love Koivu, he has skill and you can see he works his a$$ off every game, and is not a superstar overrated looser like Kovalev

Kovy-White-Little (why change a great formula?)
Kozzie-Koivu-Peverley (amazing 2nd line)
Stuart-Reasoner-Perrin or Crab(i love the Chemistry between Stuart and Crabb, its amazing)
Boulton-Thorbs-Any other grinder, preferlably other than Slater

Enstrom-Oduya
Bogs-XLB
Ansi-Hainsey

(Boris-Oyst)

I hope we can get youngsters in there like our 4th pick, ESPO, Lasu, Kulda and Kulda… or even Postma cause he had an awesome year

Ranallo, I certainly agree that if the player’s contract really, truly isn’t a distraction for the lockerroom, that the players can relate to “contract negotiation issues.” I’m going to assume that players, pretty much, all want to make the most they can*. The asterisk refers to the framework of the organization to which they belong. But even, say Kovalchuk, knows that a $10 million-a-year salary is going to hinder any organization’s ability to put 4 quality lines together, and could seriously jeopardize the quality of his linemates.

Segue to Heatley … I think Alfredsson and Spezza probably wish Heatley had done things differently. Speculation alert!! I have zero proof of that. And if they were directly asked, they’re going have a political answer. I’d wager Spezza and Alfie WANT Dany on their line. It’s a great line. It’s very productive. Some argued, that for the past few seasons, it was the best line in the league. But, now there’s media involved. And if Heatley leaves, Spezza and Alfredsson have to wonder what’s coming in Heatley’s place, to their line. I don’t think Heatley’s actions have created a positive media outlook on the situation. I don’t know if Heatley will get traded out, or what. If he doesn’t, and this all blows over, things may turn out just fine. If Heater doesn’t get traded, and becomes a sourpuss in the lockerroom, and/or his production and attitude greatly decline, it’s going to be an issue. Heatley doesn’t want that, either, as I’m sure he wants his next team to welcome him with open arms, not cast a suspicious eye at him. I think Alfredsson and Spezza probably wonder WHY Heatley wants out. Or, maybe they know. These are the things we’re almost never privy to.

From everything I read from Wild fans, Gaborik wants an open system. He wants a green light to go to the net and pot a few. Lemaire’s system didn’t allow for that.

Which leads me to Heatley…do you think Alfreddson and Spezza (and the others) are supportive of Heatley, angry at him, or understand it’s a business but wishes he would’ve done it differently?

Toby — I’m not refuting the fact (it’s a fact) that the defense could use some upgrades…but I don’t agree that ridding the team of Enstrom is in any way an improvement (as LAC was saying). I’d love to see such depth in Atlanta that Enstrom was their 4th or 5th best defender, but unfortunately I can’t at this point in time.

Kozzy — White — Little

Army — Reasy — Knuble

Boultsy — Slater — Stuart

Tobbe & Bogey

Hainsey & Scuderi / Zanon / Vaananen

Salmela & Boris

XLB for depth

Lehts & Moose

Oh what fun it is to day dream!! Ridiculous speed on 3 of 4 lines. A very savvy & gritty shut-down 3rd line still capable of scoring 55-60 goals. Biggest problem would be PK depth, but you could sit Boulton, bring in Crabb to rotate Stewy & Reasy, Pevs & Slates, Crabb & White.

Rolling 4 lines capable of scoring at any moment could be just what John Anderson is looking for. And you would still have gifted 2 way C on all four lines. You would also have the flexibility of moving Knuble up and down depending on match-ups and have 3 net crashers to choose from for the PP (Army, Knubes & Little). Hmmmmm…

Bob: If there’s any consolation, it’s that this year … the organization has an ultimatum hanging over their heads from Kovalchuk. The bad news might just be … that they’ve already chalked him up as a casualty of Free Agency, and will set the budget at $45.5 million, irrespective of what Kovalchuk’s wishes might be. Truthfully, I hope the organization can take care of its own business. Armstrong, Lehtonen, Pavelec, Valabik, and Little are all eligible for contracts, some proactive, some not. It dawns on me, all of a sudden, that if ownership has quit on the prospect of Kovalchuk retention, that they still have to plan for the coming years. In short, they must start to plan their “post Kovalchuk” future. I know, that’s borderline blasphemy. But, there it is.

Ranallo, I follow my hunches. If Gaborik doesn’t attend choir practice, I’ll let it slide. Chuckling. But if he becomes a contractual headache that his next GM has to clean up, will you admit I was right to have suspicions? Speculatively, of course.

Back to Kovalchuk’s ineligibility in 2005, had Kovalchuk been subjected to a waiver claim, I gotta think he would have been lost. Somehow, my brain processed “waiver claim possibility” as ineligiblity for Thrashers use. I was wrong.

Is Allan Walsh Pavelec’s agent? What if Walsh thinks Pavelec’s contract value is $6.33 million? And Pavelec agrees. Do they sit there, waiting. Until they get it. Or, do they come down on the price, realizing it’s just not available? And working within the framework that the Thrashers budget allows.

I’d like a Minnesota Wild fan to chime in, as that is someone would know better than I, what the deal was with GM Risebrough and Head Coach Jacques Lemaire vis-a-vis Marian Gaborik, and his RFA contract. If it turns out that Gaborik is a pretty decent guy, after all, I’ll sing a new song. I know. Why can’t I just give him the ‘benefit of the doubt?’ Well, I saw a Wild team reach the CF, energize its fan base with all sorts of momentum and positive energy, in 2003. Then their most visible player’s agent says he won’t return for less than $6.5 million-a-year, in 2003-04, with the uncertainty of the lockout looming in 2005. The next reports I saw, said Gaborik would lower his salary to $4.4 million. Eventually, he took $10 million, plus incentives, over 3-years. In this regard, I must say that Gaborik (and his agent), eventually, tried to work with the team. But why couldn’t he (they) have just agreed to compromise a bit earlier? Okay. Maybe Minnesota was ‘low-balling’ him a little bit. And for that, they must endure some criticism. Gaborik was their star player. He shouldn’t be ‘nickeled and dimed.’ How ’bout this. I’ll agree to keep a more open-mind about Gaborik. But I want to keep my eye on that situation. I agree … that players … sometimes … get unfairly mislabeled. Is Kovalchuk a selfish, defensively uncoachable player? Not really. Is Gaborik a “me first, gimme, gimme, gimme” guy? Maybe he isn’t. But fairly or unfairly, “face of the franchise” type players are the standard bearers. Do they have an obligation to work within the framework of the situation they find themselves in? Or do they selfishly expect more? Some will say, “yes.” Others will say, “no.”