First off, Franke said the two sides were not close on a contract.
``I asked him if he wanted us to look around and he said he did,'' Franke said. ``The night before we made the move he told (Komets coach Gary Graham) again that we might as well shop him around. It came down to business. The business part of it didn't work out so with his blessing we checked out the possibility of a trade.''
``We got a good player in Hughes, and we had to give up a good player in Rizk,'' Franke said. ``Both teams got the person they wanted and that's what trades should be all about. I hate to see him go, but this is a new opportnity for him. If we see him play this season, if he plays in Alaska, we'll be in the finals and we'll both be happy.''
What do I believe? If they were close on money, he'd have been signed already. Komets had already agreed to give him a raise by protecting his rights.
Whatever. It doesn't matter now.
Comments
One can read a lot into what was said there. JM could of asked for more $$$ because he really didn't want to come back to FW especially after getting a raise being a protected player. Interesting times in Komet land has not been this much controversy in the off season in a long time. They still have a lot of work to do in terms of goalies and the much needed size upfront otherwise we are going to be a perimeter hockey club with the standard question as to why nobody is willing to crash the next or play in the "dirty" area. It also appears the clock is running out on establishing a true affiliation agreement with an NHL/AHL club. It would seem they are not looking to be a "feeder system" team but a place an NHL/AHL team can send a player or two for ice time.
...and yet the story "Rizk expects to sign soon" dated 7/24 was one of total optimism.
I'm old enough to know better and not be surprised until the dotted lines are signed and complete. I guess I'm a little surprised by this. Rizk always seemed to be a good guy developed and trained by Puhalski. I was pulling for him to be part of this team.
Hughes better be the real deal. He better live up to the accolades afforded him by Coach Graham. Little by little the familiar guys are going. The personality of the team is now changing whether that is good or bad.
Here's wishing Rizk good luck in the future. He's going to a good franchise and I'm sure he'll be successful.
What's next? In my opinion the Komets cannot afford giving up any more goal scorers. I predict the "futures" to San Francisco will be a defenseman or the rights to Maggio.
David Franke and Gary Graham need to get busy. Still weak in the goal scoring department and, of course, with goaltending.
I have faith in them but I am disappointed today.
The Ks give up a player who MIGHT have star potential for a player who already has it and has had a proven track record. ( not like Risk.) There is not a team in the ECHL who would not have made this trade. Proven commodity for unproven commodity. Alaska was dealing with a player who wanted to leave for personal reasons and its get what you can get before the deal goes sour. I liked Risk but cannot go so far and give him all this 'guaranteed going to be a super star status ' that some of you are giving him. I hope he does well and the deal is a win win for for teams
Am I recalling right, but was it Alaska who played the season last year without a affiliate and did very well ?
Crap...really liked you JM, your play, attitude and tenacity.....best of luck to you on your new team.
Affiliation, most likely not.
As stated many times before by me.....GOALIE?....someone else on this blog had a great point about a goalie being associated with an affiliation.....class goalie (no affiliation)....time will tell.
Average size up front is about 5'10" and 6'1" on D....still need size on offense to (as said prior) to crash the nets...not here yet....also only 2 vets and no leadership on D.
My guess is they'll have tao working agreements and get two or three players from each.
Ron, are you taking the Frankes word that Hughes is a "star" in this league? He MAY become one this coming season; but he isnt one yet....
Hughes had 39 points during the regular season while Rizk had 34 (mostly from the 3rd line)... Hughes most productive season was 2 seasons ago in the CHL at 41 points.
Hughes is far from a bonified "star" at this ppoint in his career; but he could become one....the jury is still out.
Rizk? 19 goals was a good start for his first season in the ECHL and if he gets regular time on a top line with some PP time, I could see him easily getting into the 25-30 goal range with that good shot of his....
JR i think it was a good trade for both teams. Each team got rid of players who did not want to stay. Alaska success seemed to be more aligned around Hughes than the Ks success (or lack of ) with Risk. Risk was suppose to quarterback the powerplay at one point. It was a total failure but so was everything else on the power play no matter who they got to quarterback it. Alaskas success in the standings was remarkable considering they stayed independent. The Ks season was dreadful with a afilliate.
NOW AFTER READING RISKS COMMENTS IT HAS ME WONDERING.
Ron
Your "Alaska independent" sentence should have stated, Alaska's success in the standings was remarkable considering they had 4 current NHLers on their team before the lock-out ended.
All four were from Anchorage and included Scott Gomez. When they were there, they accounted for 32 percent of the goals scored. All four players averaged 0.5 goals per game and a point per game.
They faced only Western Confernce teams ( 8 other teams ) throughout the whole season.
After the NHLers left, they still finished with the regular season title. Then got bounced in the 2nd round of the Western Conference playoffs.
As I said earlier in the week, a positive with being independent is that the top free-agent goalies want to go to the Independents of the ECHL. The Aces had two #1 goalies on their team that didn't have to share any time with someone sent down because they were independent.
3 NHL teams left without a AA affiliation.
No goalie signing as of yet.
Most signed players so far in the ECHL
I vote for the affiliation but it looks like the Komets are going Independent.
Blake Sebring you are funny '' Komets had already agreed to give him a raise by protecting his rights. ''
really? if you really like a player and are aware of everything he contributed to this team by ONLY playing on the third line... never saw him on the power play.. you would give him what he deserves and all the Fans know JM loves this game and is not after the money but more after what he deserves and that is playing on the top 2 lines and some pp time, if we do happen to play against him its going to be really interesting that is for sure.
Well, then go to camp and earn a spot on a higher line. That's what everyone has to do th is year. No one should be guaranteed anything.
Old concept in the world today, I know.
Blake you are spot on. Thanks for your comment. Earning something is fading into American history. AWESOME
They gave Shrock a raise too by protecting his rights...LOL. Big deal. Mistake letting Rizk go
Tsk, tsk, Schrock will always be a draw no matter what....it is surprising reading all these comments that most of YOU folks cannot see this or accept it.
I will miss JM as stated before....loved his style of play....would have liked to see him possibly play on a higher line.
Hope they do not take an affiliation Blake.
What you cannot see, Who/suz, is that many of us do not care if he pulls in a couple extra fans with Schrock on the roster... All some of us see is the lack of production from him for a guy making what he is making...
Face it.... Komets diehards will always be here, no matter how many favorites leave....they are not going anywhere... AND Schrock can easily be replaced in the role he is SUPPOSED to be filling on this team. Players filling that role always bring in the casual fans, especially when the Komets hype machine starts grinding out adds....
To finish, I hope that Schrock proves me and many others wrong this season with a standout year...
And what you cannot see is that many people do.
Both sides have to learn to deal with it.
Just exactly how am I failing to see the other side Blake? I am defending others (and myself's) right to have another viewpoint.
I see that side just fine, I like Schrock when he's playing the game he's supposed to be playing and the style that will make him successful in this league... I just do not agree with bringing him back for another go especially for what he is making in salary plus a raise for getting a qualified offer. I also understand that you cannot have ALL the holdovers/fan favorites leave in the same offseason...thats a marketing nightmare.
We "get it"....; but we dont have to "like it".....
I still hope that Schrock has a career year proves many of us wrong...