• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

317 Excellent

About JayDangles

  • Rank
    Comets Prospect

Profile Information

  • Location
    Parts Unknown

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Only reason to trade Boeser is whether JB can predict Brock's potential. So far, his play worries me this year. He went from being a play finisher to a play contributor.. he skipped past play maker on the downward. I think right now he has good value and a good contract. IMHO I don't think Boeser is the big star we project him to be. Nothing against the guy, just see something missing. If you can trade him while he is high on other teams list, it might be a good move.
  2. Oh good, I always love a good "How much does CDC overvalue our players" Proposal. Especially when our player is an unproven Russian fella! Yeah, sorry guys, he isn't worth as much as you think......yet
  3. Well I wasn't saying I agree with the signing, just pointing out WHY we signed him.... also, your points are all valid, however they have the advantage of hindsight. Unfortunately, when signing a contract with a player, you're unable to predict the future, so therefore must pay based on the past. Unless your post is dated July 1, 2019, then you are simply pointing out things after the fact and criticizing something after the fact.
  4. We signed him because he can sometimes elevate his game with intensity and is a large body.... but the primary reason is he was putting up offensive numbers and has strong zone exits... at the time of the signing we had a declining Edler and a relatively unknown Hughes for offense from the defence. We signed Myers to give us some offense.. that's why.
  5. This doesn't hold water IMHO. The team was playing shaky and inconsistent well before Markstrom was injured. So that's a moot point. In regards to the young core statement, this implies that the primary issue is inconsistency. i.e when the young core is struggling, so is the team. This is incorrect. Hughes, Petterson, Bo, Gaudette, Virtanen are all on pace for career years, in Huggy's case, record breaking years. Our young core is not the issue. They have been very consistent, despite their colleagues. The issue is not our young guys, its everyone else. Green has options, my issue is we have an extremely stubborn coach who takes zero risks, repeats obvious mistakes, and makes excuses when he should be learning. He is a first time NHL coach, who is acting like he has coach 1000 games.
  6. 1 more! In all honesty, this is the first year Benning has iced HIS team. When he took this job, at the time, we all knew this was a minimum 5 year plan. Well here we are, the Benning team has arrived, If he truly believes Green is the right coach to carry this team to the next level then I will change my opinion. In other words, if there's a new coach on the bench before October 1st, Benning stays.... If Green shows up to training camp, then both Benning and Green need to go. Fair?
  7. OP - You can't say in an article "every team has 1 bad contract" and then blame Benning for a bad contract. IMO Benning has done a great job at drafting our young guns, and the Miller trade is sheer perfection. Yes Erikssons contract is a bad one, but you yourself stated every GM has a bad contract on their team, and you're using the super power of hindsight. At this point, Benning is not the immediate issue. Eriksson's 6m CAP hit didn't contribute to the breakdown in CBJ. He could be in the minors if Green wanted him there Goldobin's 900K hit did not score a couple softies against Demko in Toronto. Sven's concussion and subsequent soft play is not Benning's fault. At the time of signing that was a sweet contract. I know what you're saying, if we had that money free'd up we could use it to buy better players... but I truly believe we have the players. Boeser, Petterson, Miller, Toffoli, Bo... all capable of scoring 30 goals. We have the talent, Jake, Leivo, Pearson, Gaudette in the 15-25 goal range. Our issue is player deployment, not who is on the roster and how much they are getting paid. IMO Green and company are not capable of coaching playoff style hockey. That's where the issue lays.
  8. Isn't this just the sh*ts… we have Motte who has all the heart and physically, but none of the size. We have Jake, with all the size, speed and skill, but none of the physicality or heart. The only difference is one of those players can change what they lack. This is why hockey is so fun and frustrating at the same time!
  9. I've always just assumed those are the sober people on CDC!
  10. Sorry, Didn't know I was dealing with the Math Police over here. My bad officer
  11. I just don't see how we don't resign him. If anything, look at Hughes' numbers this year. he is doing remarkable things because he is an amazing player, but don't discount the fact that Tanev provides a steady presence and stay at home style that allows QH to roam and get involved. Not to mention, Tanev is on pace for a career year points wise also. I think we need to keep Tanev so him and QH can keep doing what they are doing. 4 years at $4.8 is a 10% raise and will give a very strong pairing
  12. Uh oh... went from feeling like we are in a really good spot... To now Marky potentially out long term. Why can't we have nice things!