oldnews
Members-
Posts
53,830 -
Joined
-
Days Won
186
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by oldnews
-
Value of Dougie Hamilton (Discussion/Proposal)
oldnews replied to J.I.A.H.N's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Yawn. 1 Roman Josi 29 NSH D 1499 88.18 109 52 9 0 0 16 49 65 22 6.1 4.8 0.0 10.9 2 John Carlson 30 WSH D 1267 74.53 56 83 23 2 5 15 60 75 12 7.2 3.5 0.0 10.7 3 Victor Hedman 29 TBL D 820 48.24 4 25 104 27 4 11 44 55 27 4.7 4.8 0.0 9.5 4 Alex Pietrangelo 30 STL D 527 31.00 1 9 24 104 22 16 36 52 11 4.8 4.3 0.0 9.1 5 Jaccob Slavin 25 CAR D 138 8.12 0 1 5 15 61 6 30 36 30 2.2 5.7 0.0 7.9 6 Shea Theodore 24 VEG D 39 2.29 0 0 1 7 13 13 33 46 12 4.2 3.9 0.0 8.1 7 Dougie Hamilton 26 CAR D 35 2.06 0 0 2 5 10 14 26 40 30 4.0 4.6 0.0 8.6 8 Zach Werenski 22 CBJ D 23 1.35 0 0 0 5 8 20 21 41 9 4.4 4.8 0.0 9.1 9 Cale Makar 21 COL D 23 1.35 0 0 0 2 17 12 38 50 12 4.8 2.9 0.0 7.7 10 Charlie McAvoy 22 BOS D 14 0.82 0 0 1 1 6 5 27 32 24 1.8 5.1 0.0 6.9 11 Esa Lindell 25 DAL D 5 0.29 0 0 1 0 0 3 20 23 5 0.6 4.7 0.0 5.4 12 Anthony DeAngelo 24 NYR D 5 0.29 0 0 0 1 2 15 38 53 12 5.2 3.2 0.0 8.4 12 Miro Heiskanen 20 DAL D 5 0.29 0 0 0 1 2 8 27 35 14 2.4 5.4 0.0 7.8 14 Seth Jones 25 CBJ D 5 0.29 0 0 0 0 5 6 24 30 10 1.9 4.6 0.0 6.5 15 Quinn Hughes 20 VAN D 3 0.18 0 0 0 0 3 8 45 53 -10 4.2 2.3 0.0 6.5 15 Shea Weber 34 MTL D 3 0.18 0 0 0 0 3 15 21 36 8 3.4 3.8 0.0 7.3 17 Kris Letang 32 PIT D 2 0.12 0 0 0 0 2 15 29 44 0 4.0 3.4 0.0 7.4 17 Ivan Provorov 23 PHI D 2 0.12 0 0 0 0 2 13 23 36 11 2.8 4.3 0.0 7.1 19 Jonas Brodin 26 MIN D 1 0.06 0 0 0 0 1 2 26 28 15 1.2 4.0 0.0 5.2 19 Zdeno Chara 42 BOS D 1 0.06 0 0 0 0 1 5 9 14 26 0.1 5.0 0.0 5.1 19 Drew Doughty 30 LAK D 1 0.06 0 0 0 0 1 7 28 35 -16 2.1 3.3 0.0 5.4 19 Torey Krug 28 BOS D 1 0.06 0 0 0 0 1 9 40 49 -4 4.3 2.3 0.0 6.7 19 Jared Spurgeon 30 MIN D 1 0.06 0 0 0 0 1 12 20 32 -1 2.7 2.6 0.0 5.4 Norris votes (from highlight reel media) doesn't mean that player - at that price - would be a good fit here. Er, DeAngelo was 12th in Norris voting... There are a ton of players on that last that would not make sense here. You have paragraphs of my explanation to refer to if you're confused about why I would pass on Hamilton - I couldn't care less about Norris voting. There are a handful of players there that would make sense - but are generally pipe dreams. One little additional factor you might need to consider: "hey Dougie, how would you like to come man our 2nd powerplay unit?" Sign all the free agents! -
Value of Dougie Hamilton (Discussion/Proposal)
oldnews replied to J.I.A.H.N's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Too late on Cernak in all likelihood - at this point Foote might be more realistic. Those aren't the only two - that is awfully reductive. There are lots of D I'd consider... Tanev Pesce Larsson Severson Ristolainen Petry Savard Mayfield Whitecloud Myers (Philippe) Timmins Manson Stralman Roy -
Value of Dougie Hamilton (Discussion/Proposal)
oldnews replied to J.I.A.H.N's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
First thing people might want to look at when proposing acquisitions - particularly ones to play with Hughes - are things like where their production comes from. With a player like Hamilton -you can trim 1/3 of his production off immediately - because he won't be quarterbacking the powerplay here - that is Hughes' role and Hughes is going nowhere in that sense. And then you have to ask whether that player - that you're signing based on a premium/role they won't play here - whether the rest of their game is worth the 7.5 million you're proposing to pay them. And then look at the context of their 5 on 5 outcomes - who they have played with. If their principal partners have been Norris D at every step - Chara, Giordano, Slavvin - then you have to ask yourself what that player is likely to look like relatively - when they no longer have that #1 beside them (sorry, but Hughes is not a "#1" - certainly not in the sense that all situations, hard minutes, two way legitimate top 20 defensemen - like Chara was, like Giordano was/is, like Slavvvin is)....Is Hamilton's 5 on 5 even likely to sustain? And then we also need to ask - what is it we need in a RHD beyond being a partner for Hughes? And the answer to that, imo is arguably or ideally a principal penalty killer - which is a much more important facet in an acquisition than an overlapping powerplay quarterback imo (we already have a few capable 2nd unit D).. So if you can't get that all situations type player, you lean towards the one that can handle himself in hard minutes, can anchor Hughes and let him do his thing, can otherwise kill penalties... and balance out the blueline better. -
Value of Dougie Hamilton (Discussion/Proposal)
oldnews replied to J.I.A.H.N's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
oldnews says oldnews says. Hmm. What did Tom Sestito say about Motte? What does Sestito say in every trade or signing thread? Hamilton is the Canes #3 - but Tom Sestito says he's a top 20. LOL to that. I'd make my point but I don't think I'll bother with your one-liner until you are able to substantiate your claim. 'Just because he's an introvert doesn't make him an unattractive target'... wgaf? If you think he's a top 20 NHL I don't want to see the team of Barries, Subbans and Gardiners you'd build. Tom Sestito provides more evidence that Hamilton is one of the most over-rated ("top 20") defensemen in the NHL. Exactly. What the Canucks need is a Pesce. However, the cost of acquiring Pesce would be steep. 4 years 4ish million cap remaining on his excellent contract. However there are a number of good potential targest out there that might be avialable pre-expansion draft..... Some young guys like Foote will be e.d. eligible. Timmins won't but I'd love to take him off the Avs. I like Larsson as a better fit and more affordable target than a piggy-back Hamilton, who wouldn't be able to do that here unless he were playing with an Edler - which negates the point. Guys like Mayfield might be available / unprotectable - and his contract is as good as it gets. -
Value of Dougie Hamilton (Discussion/Proposal)
oldnews replied to J.I.A.H.N's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Pass. Classic case of propped up by Norris quality partners. Chara, Giordano, Slavvin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Hamilton. I put him in a class with a handful of other shiny assets / flavours of the week that I'm glad never wound up here...(Subban, Barrie, Karlson) Not the partner I'd want for Hughes. -
there's no there, there.
-
Francesco Aquilini says "I have no plans to make changes."
oldnews replied to AriGold2.0's topic in Canucks Talk
Not sure if serious. Spinning that as an "attack" on your person is ridiculous. The retool for another run narrative is comical. Again - I think you probably understood the point - but you're avoiding it - for obvious reasons. Linden hired Benning. Linden had full jurisdiction over hockey decisions. You've omited / ignored those simple facts in your Benning and ownership narrative. -
Francesco Aquilini says "I have no plans to make changes."
oldnews replied to AriGold2.0's topic in Canucks Talk
I think you're brighter than this tbh. The axis of your 'doomed to fail' assumption is a hopelessly oversimplified one-liner. And for someone that raises and defends Linden - (that was you, was it not?) - one would think you might remember two critical things; 1) Linden hired Benning, and 2) Linden was given full jurisdiction over hockey decisions - stated publicly by FA (probably in part as a reassurance that he himself was not dictating hockey decisions, after the bizarre, and radically failed Tortorella experiment, which had virtually no 'MIke Gillis' sense to it) The idea that Benning came in colluding with or simply as an opportunist, to serve a doomed to fail owner - is absurd. And you need to work on your facts. The first three moves Benning made: 1) Garrison, Costello, and a 7th to Tampa for a 2nd round pick 2) Dorsett for a 3rd 3) Kesler and 3rd for a 1st, Bonino and Sbisa. Which of those moves is still having a 'strong effect on what's happening now? -
Shore is probably too good for Edmonton to be waiving imo. Doesn't really make sense when you look at that taxi squad of theirs... I'd take Shore over Nygard without a second thought. And James Neal - has been downright awful - did they waive him to send a message and are recalling him? Why? Chiasson likewise - has been awful. I'd waive him in a heartbeat before Shore. Shore hasn't played center since 16/17 - so I'm not sure he'd have much utility here. Even with Motte and Bailey injured (and Hawryluk) I still think it makes more sense to give guys like MacEwen or Hawryluk (who we made the point of signing) the ice time... But I don't necessarily 'get' the move - or the Edmonton Oilers for that matter.
-
Francesco Aquilini says "I have no plans to make changes."
oldnews replied to AriGold2.0's topic in Canucks Talk
I think you might be forgetting or ignoring what preceded that season. Speaking of gong shows, as you are....the asset value of the franchise, virtually top to bottom was 'tanked' - and not in a positive way - by the Tortorella gong show - not just on ice, but also publicly chirping about players - reducing their value in both their outcomes and his public devaluation of them. So I think it helps form more context and a better picture - of what their options were - combined with the existing contracts - when the inheritance was devalued players and the need to 'rebuild'/rescuscitate their assets before making them moveable/returns attainable. -
Motte. Beagle Edler. none of whom are in that list. Belong in the mix with Boeser, Hoglander. Honorable mention to Juolevi (not as "mvp" but) who I'd say is also in the running with Hoglander as the biggest 'riser'/pleasant performer thus far, who couldn't necessarily be 'expected' to be as good as he's been.
-
9 games is enough to conclude that he wasn't himself there? There are a lot of players who "are not themselves" early this season. Had 27 hits in those 9 games (10 minutes a game) - which translates into a 240 hit season - which would be the 2nd best of his career. Did he really lack edge and nastiness and need to be removed from the group as if a bad influence? Why the shade? Again, sounds like Friedman trying too hard to create an angle. Perhaps Carolina simply wanted the player - values the depth addition (whereas Ottawa isn't as concerned about short term results?) Ottawa also has a number of centers - Stepan, Tierney, Norris, White, Paul...all who were playing that role with more frequency than Paquette.... And/or perhaps Ottawa simply wanted Dzingel back.
-
my eyes are starting to fail me lol. I just don't watch the game looking to assign blame to a predetermined scapegoat. Watching that progression and reducing that goal to simply a Virtanen fault - doesnt' have a whiff of objectivity to it - let alone attempting to hang a loss like that on Virtanen. He's well down the list of players to be 'called out' after that loss.
-
what? I think I might need a translation on the 'metric' you're talking about. If you're talking about penalties - wadr - Edler plays a legitimate matchup/shutdown role, plays a far heavier, more aggressive game than Hughes, literally less than half the ozone starts of Hughes - and is the team's lead penalty killer (in other words he kills about 4x what he takes) - and his penalty minutes are inflated in a misrepresentative small sample = if you're trying to make a case regarding 22 penalty minutes vs 8, you're grasping / reaching for straws.
-
I have really liked the Motte Beagle Virtanen line - it has looked very good (although those two have looked good with anyone)... Virtanen brings another element of speed - and some more heaviness on the forecheck - and a very good ability to compensate against the rush with his speed. I think he makes a very good fit on that line - and complements it well - while also being on the ice with arguably the two hardest working, shift in, shift out Canucks is a good meter for him to relate to. I think that line can cause fits on the forecheck, pin opponents scoring lines in their zone, defending (and not playing to their strengths) - and it could be good habit-forming minutes for Virtanen. I'd be inclined to leave him there - and I think there's a good chance he'd still be able to produce some secondary, counterpunching scoring - as Motte does - because really, Virtanen is a real transition threat - and whether he's using his speed to get in on the forecheck or in transition (coming out of ozone starts), he can be an asset to that line. I couldn't care less about the '4th' line stigma or expectation he climb the lineup - Motte and Beagle typically play 14-16 very important minutes - if Virtanen can hold his own in that role, then that's a positive contribution (and there's no reason to believe he can't - he's been fully capable of handling minutes on Sutter's wing for years now).
-
It sort of sounds like Friedman is trying too hard to find an explanation for the deal. Is a 900k one year deal to a player like Vesey really an 'experiment' than can be 'in trouble'? He's a depth signing - marginal competition for a spot - low risk - it's not like there's trouble involved when players like that don't command minutes/a roster spot - unless they were banking on him being more than he is. The even bigger stretch would be the contract space thing - already having 3 spaces - and no cap to fill them with....the 'flexibility' is never negative thing seems like he's grasping at straws. Perhaps there's not that much need to 'explain' the deal - aside from they think they might be able to get something out of Galchenyuk...perhaps Malhotra can. Funny thing - there's more than one site where Galchenyuk can't be found - not on the Sens, not on the Canes, not on the Leafs....perhaps they're not bothering to edit his details, waiting for the next shoe to drop...
-
You make a good point about Hughes getting liberty that Virtanen does not. However - you've paraphrased an idea - with no context. By 'not putting reigns' on Hughes - an idea in a vacuum - I would take that to mean you allow him to take risks and live with his mistakes. But staying on the ice for 2 and a half minutes - repeatedly - is not the kind of 'mistake' I'm talking about - it's a mental/judgement issue. It's unacceptable for a few reasons - first, it says to his team-mates that he believes the difference must be/can only be made by him - it's not a team-mentality - and second, it exposes himself, and puts the team in a vulnerable position - as effectively played out and was magnified by the penalty he took. I highly doubt part of Green's 'green light' is to stay on the ice as long as he wants. I have absolutely no concerns about Juolevi. I might like to see Virtanen with more ice time - but I generally trust Green's judgement - I highly doubt it's simply about favorites or double-standards - I suspect there is some pretty good reasoning behind it. I believe he's leveraging Virtanen's minutes to make/try to force him to maximize every shift he gets - and I'm pretty sure he's tried the opposing strategy as well at times. I thought Virtanen was generally quite effective last night, fishbowl incident aside.
-
If you want to 'respect' the young players - give them a #proper "foundation". And realize/recognize/respect/appreciate what the foundation provides/complements. Which is what Benning has done. Which is what Gillis did when he brought in Malhotra types to support (veteran) Sedins. If you don't like it - you don't understand the game, or team-building. And for the record - Eriksson is not one of those 'foundation' pieces - he was a mistake - of a different kind. None of Beagle, Sutter, Edler, etc are 'mistakes'. They are necessary foundation, period. You might argue that there may be better cap value options out there - but until you are able to identify/name those and can realistically present a real world opportunity to acquire or sign those, then it's pointless - and regardless, these types of players are needed and they are among the best in the business in their roles.
-
Stop expecting young players to 'dominate' or carry your team. It's a noob perspective. Expect EP and Hughes to struggle with the 'possession' game and compensate with high end creativity and finishing. EP is not finishing. People that don't understand the rest of the equation panic. It's an outlier set of circumstances that will return to the mean once he gains his confidence, and as he put is - "challenge harder" and "move his feet."