X-PatLostInEdm

Members
  • Content count

    341
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

183 Good

About X-PatLostInEdm

  • Rank
    Comets Regular
  1. I realize that, but I would also lump honouring treaties in as a "national interest", so I think the point stands. And a pre-emptive thank you for that, btw. But, by the same logic, wouldn't China be obligated to support North Korea in any military wrangling with the US? Not that I think it would come to that. Even Un isn't stupid enough to believe his regime would survive a real standoff. I'm sure he'd be deposed with Chinese "assistance" if that developed.
  2. If it's in your national interest to do so, you will. If it's not, you won't. Nor should you, if that's the case.
  3. If you were China, what would you do if the US started massing troops along your ally's border? You'd match the move. Maybe tighten the screws on Taiwan. Maybe Japan, too. Despite what SF says, China's navy would not be pushovers, and are concentrated in the area as opposed to globally deployed like the US. China may not like Un, but they have other alliances that are watching what happens. The Russians would be looking to press advantage somewhere else (Ukraine?) because tensions and military posturing in the Sea of Japan would draw US resources away from other areas. The threat isn't direct military action, it's the balance of power and influence that's the real problem.
  4. Laugh all you want, but that's how realpolitik works.
  5. Unless China intervenes. And they just might if they think they can give the US Navy a bloody nose. Would strengthen their posturing in the South China Sea.
  6. Yeah, I just checked and you're right. It was mainly Huddy. That's what I get for relying on meatware.
  7. You sure? I could've sworn it was Gregg. The point stands, though. Huddy wasn't exactly a scoring machine either.
  8. Well he's rockin' some Weber Lite, now. He might be going on a points diet.
  9. I think it's you who are seriously the best. You're doing the heavy lifting. The rest of us are just kibitzing. One final thought. If it turns out not to be medical/psychological, whatever, and she's just in a funk, maybe take her out and each donate a pint of blood. I know I always feel like I've done something important when I've done it. Then go out for a nice lunch to.. you know.. replenish your... umm... blood sugar... or something. Yeah, that works.
  10. I hear what you're saying, but you just can't assemble a pair like LaPointe and Savard anymore, which is basically what your ideal is and what the quoted post is pining for. (who am I kidding, it's everybody's ideal). The financials won't allow it for any length of time. But to answer my own question from about 5 pages ago. Orr's partner was Don Awrey. Coffey's was Randy Gregg. Awrey once went 153 games without scoring a goal. Gregg never cracked double digits on goals, save for one season. Both of them were top pair d on SC winners, one of them on a dynasty team. Neither of them ever got anywhere near a power play. Wasn't their job. And if I was going to minus you, which I didn't btw, it wouldn't be for expressing an opinion. It would be for using a thread title as clickbait. Not cool, man. Other than that, it's been fun.
  11. It's not just coaching, though. I mean, no amount of coaching is going to turn Tanev into Orr. We just don't have the firepower we used to, so the system has to adjust to limit damage. But even on a juggernaut team, Tanev's skills have a lot of value. Anybody remember who Orr's defence partner was? Paul Coffey's?
  12. Well, I think the OP is under valuing Tanev's passing, for a start. But that's as maybe. My main question for you would be if the coaching staff were pushing Tanev to carry the play more, and he wasn't doing it, why haven't they reduced his minutes? Or changed Elder's partner? To me, Tanev is doing exactly as instructed and he's very good at it. And so is Edler.
  13. I think this is where you're losing people. Being a rock defensively doesn't put increased pressure on your partner to produce offense. It allows your more offensively gifted partner to try and create because he can have confidence that if it all goes sideways, you've got his back and can handle the situation.
  14. I don't agree with all the flak Edler gets on this forum either. But is the answer to try and shift the "blame"onto other players? If you have a problem with Tanev's stay at home style, that's fine. But if you're using that to try and pump up your own guy, I really don't see a difference between you and the Elder haters.
  15. If the question was how much faith the fanbases had in the LEAGUE offices, I'd say we were in the right spot. But I also notice the bottom 5 on this list are all big markets or hockey-mad. More likely to have complainers.