• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

125 Good

About Profanity

  • Rank
    Comets Prospect
  • Birthday 10/30/1982

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,582 profile views
  1. What intrigues me isn't this comment, but the +9. It's one thing to be positive, but it is another to be delusional.
  2. B-. Benning didn't excel nor under perform in this draft. He was dealt a bad hand when CBJ picked PLD. I would have prefered if he picked MT instead of OJ, but I wouldn't say OJ is a terrible pick. Overall, he did an average job, however, he seems a bit lost in direction when PLD was picked, and I would have expected him to have a contingency plan for situations like this prior to the draft, not 10mins before you have to call a name out. 0.02
  3. It's just a disappointing season overall. Disappointing regular season, disappointing trade deadline, disappointing draft lottery, and disappointing draft day. Usually when your team sucks, at least you can come out of the draft feeling good. Well, not for us. We just can't catch a break, and I think I have mild depression.
  4. No sir. You might not realize this, but you are not comparing apples to apples. You are comparing the 5th OA pick with a range of picks. You only picked out the successful pick within the range in past history draft as your reasoning, which is misleading you to think you are comparing 1 to 1, but in reality, you are comparing the odds of 1 to the accumulated odds of many. To make this easy to understand: Prospect A has a 50% chance of success Prospect B has a 40% chance of success Prospect C has a 30% chance of success Prospect D has a 20% chance of success. Now what you are saying is, A has a 50% chance of success, while the odds of success for one of the prospect within B, C, and D is 66%. Your reasoning only make sense IF the decision is between choosing A, or all of B, C, and D. However, if your choice is between A, or one of B, C, or D, then it makes no sense to not pick A, as A's odd is better than B, C, and D in a standalone comparison. Honestly, if your reasoning for drafting Sergachyov is because of his ability X, Y, and Z, I wouldn't say you are wrong, but when the reasoning is because in past history, one of the 6th-9th pick will pan out better than the 5th OA pick, then your line of thinking is definitely off.
  5. It doesn't matter if your comparison is only limited to the 1st round or pick 6-9. Not drafting the BPA based on current info because there is a chance that one of the players in the 6-9 pick might pan out better is a very dangerous act. In some sense, this sounds more like drafting based on gut feeling, and it's a terrible idea. It doesn't work most of the time, and when it does, it's because of sheer luck. Just to be clear, I am not trying to give you crap, but it's a slippery slope when you are not comparing apples to apples and the argument is setup to fail from the get go.
  6. This is a flawed logic, because you are comparing the chance of success for a 5th OA pick with the chance of success for all picks from 6th to the final pick combined. There will always be hidden gems in later picks or rounds that should've gone higher in the draft, but given the current information we have now, decisions should be made base on those info, not what if scenarios.
  7. Yea, I do. What's your team name in game?
  8. Anyone still active in the game?
  9. I like how you assume I said stuff like that. I guess that helps strengthen your argument. Anyway, poor asset management has a lot more to do than the inability to trade Hamhuis.
  10. Is true we don't have a lot of desirable asset we are willing to trade away, but guess who is responsible for signing some of them? You can't take the good without looking at the bad, and vice versa. This management group might be decent at scouting and developing prospects, but they have also been horrid at a lot of other areas, and that really is an undeniable truth. Perhaps they need to bring in people who excels in asset management to minimize their deficiencies.
  11. No question, that part they have done relatively well, but in terms of asset management and this TDL, they really did poorly, and unfortunately, good management needs to be on top of their game in all aspect, not just in one area.
  12. I know a lot of people want to stay positive and show their support to the organization, but sometimes you have to call a duck a duck, and management did drop the ball on this one.
  13. If you are not aware, a lot of people knew this would happen, so this isn't some hindsight is 20/20 type of response. Everyone knew this is a ticking time bomb many months ago, and it's really up to the management (not just JB, but TL or even the ownership) to either defuse it, or pass it onto some other team. Management simply held onto it for too long, and now it exploded in their face. There is really nothing more or less about this. At the end, I am more concern with the lack of direction from the organization as a whole than the disappointing TDL. Are we rebuilding from scratch? Nope. Are we pushing for a playoff spots? Slim chance. Are we trying to load up on draft picks and build from drafting like JB said? Doesn't look like we are trading for picks either. You see, I am not even trying to beat a dead horse, because I can't even find the dead horse.
  14. Jim cornered himself into a bad situation by holding onto the playoff hopes for far too long, and in the end, this limited his options. Anyway, it is what it is, and I am not angry or mad about this, because I never expected this management group to be competent.