oldnews
Members-
Posts
53,830 -
Joined
-
Days Won
186
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by oldnews
-
Show us what your blow up would have looked like. I mean really - you walk in, Tortorella and Gillis have just left the building. Here's your team: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000392014.html Tell us where you'd get all the picks. Take Kesler, Garrison, Bieksa, Lack, or Diaz out of any story - they were dealt for picks in reality. Don't pretend to get anything for 15 pt, $5 million Burrows - or 20 pt Hansen - let alone a Goldobin, pick and Dahlen/Karlsson. Luongo is already gone. Dont pretend to be able to deal the Sedins or Edler. Try to keep it real. So here you go: Higgins (NTC) Kassian, Santorelli, Richardson, Hamhuis (NTC), we all know what happened when Hamhuis was otb, sorta. Booth, Tanev, tradeable asset - and still is - but at age 23 - he's not a teardown asset, so don't pretend to cash in on 23 yr old Tanev. Stanton, Weise, Weber, Sestito, Dalpe. Matthias, Schroeder, Jensen, Archibald, Laine, Corrado, Welsh, Zalewski, Ferriero, Peltier, Sauve OK - that's your list. Go.
-
To me the difference between the time Baertschi was acquired - and now - is somewhat obvious. When Baertshi was acquired - the Canucks had one player under 26 in their top 10 in scoring - Horvat at 10th. Regardless, Baertschi was sent to the AHL for a year btw. Right now there are 3 players 26 or older in the top 13 in scoring on this team. The spots that are being competed for - have tougher young competition looking for those spots. Goldobin isn't necessarily earning it - and further - what's keeping him out of the lineup has persisted - arguably longer than in Baertschi's case. Goldobin also faces the challenge of being the 3rd part on a Pettersson Boeser line that he isn't necessarily the best fit for - and probably even less so on the 3 other forward lines.... Baertschi was a pretty natural fit with Horvat, while virtually the only other young forward on the roster was Granlund - who himself scored 19 goals -again, in less opportune minutes than Goldobin has played..... Baertschi had 18 goals, 35 pts, 50% ozone starts and was 11th on the team in powerplay ice time at the age Goldobin presently is - wasn't playing with Pettersson - wasn't playing the type of sheltered minutes that Goldobin is....So I think there's a case to be made that he did more to earn his minutes, in a time when there was less competition to do so.
-
Yawn. Ice time / game: Baertschi 15:08 Granlund 15:03 Goldobin 14:59 Virtanen 14:49 Powerplay ice time / game Baertschi 2:59 Goldobin 2:33 Granlund 1:34 Virtanen 1:14 Offensive zone starts Baertschi 64.8% Goldobin 64% Virtanen 45.4 Granlund 41.0 Goldobin -10 with worse on ice goal metrics than Virtanen or Granlund - who played far harder minutes - and worse relative puck possession numbers as well. You have no case.
-
Jim Benning will represent the Canucks at the 2019 Draft Lottery
oldnews replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Whatever - send Galileo - it won't make a fn difference. -
I dunno but I could not disagree more with the somewhat popular opinion here that you deal this pick to 'improve' the defense - because we're too impatient to wait a couple years on a prospect. Almost as firm on not burning an asset(s) to move up - it's too costly and the ability to draft a great player at 10.....shouldn't need to move up- but there's always the slim 'you never know'. Take Soderstrom, or Boldy - or whomever - (haven't really spent enough time on it to develop a clear favorite or list in that range) - but keep the pick, make the pick, and stay the course. Having a steady influx of young, ELCs, talent developed from within - imo is more important than going into the market looking for the right addition prematurely. Maybe I'm assuming that the right players won't be available.... Probably the only way I'd move that pick is on the floor, if a team is itching to move up a few spots - and offering an extra pick - but not if it's a circumstance where it's not worth risking missing on the player you want. There will be some damn good players available at 10. I don't really give a fk about the lottery - had zero expectations (aside from likely dropping a spot or two...). Didn't want Hughes anyway - because I hate lottery champion teams - and prefer to do things the hard way. Four years in a row of dropping - jog on NHL.
-
Gudbranson NOW officially The WORST PLAYER in the League
oldnews replied to RU SERIOUS's topic in Canucks Talk
We hear this kind of thing a lot on these boards - but people making this claim have never answered the following - feel free to tell us what those systems are and which ones need to be 'overhauled'. -
I agree - he's a better skater than Gagner imo - he doesn't attempt to hopelessly force passes repeatedly as Gagner did - almost a signature of his that used to drive me somewhat nuts. Worst case scenario I consider him at least Gagner's equal - probably a better fit - and more capable of being of utility somewhere in the lineup. Gagner earned his trip to the AHL in my opinion - and while I don't dislike him, he's one of the rare Canucks I did not enjoy watching. He was just not a good fit in this group.
-
Go ahead and make all the predictions you want - and spin off into meaningless instagram straw while you're at it. You're talking about a rookie AHLer who appears to have spent two months of the season with a fairly serious elbow injury - and you're putting way too much faith in your own ability to 'predict' his future - based on something that is highly reductive - one sample of mitigated AHL rookie scoring. That may be enough for you - it's not for me, thanks. I think we're probably done wasting our time on this - at least I am. If I stop responding - don't mistake it for something it's not.
-
I'm not gonna play "so what you're saying" games with you. You haven't bothered to see the point I was making. You are merely substituting your own binary counterpoint = a reverse fool's game - and a strawman. Probably the best quote on matters like this came from an NHL coach - I think it was Trotz = "we'll know when we know". You don't - I don't - you insisting that you can predict the failure of Lind is a waste of time imo.
-
yeah - I agreed with that - which is why I agreed that one mistake was made there - but not two. flipping him for a comparable doesn't multiply or compound it - it's still only one Spooner as opposed to one Gagner - the team didn't retain Gagner and go out and acquire/sign Spooner as well. Didn't like the Gagner signing - at the time - but flipping him was not a 'mistake' - even if Spooner were considered only his equal. I'd take Spooner over Gagner, but that's beside the point.
-
the irony is that I was responding to another of your posts - wasting my time - as you get hyper-sensitive here about a fn symbol - that is literally part of the CDC structure of responses/call it what you want. Your skin might be too thin for a discussion board. "Go look at how their production translates" - when you're talking about a rookie AHLer who had the kind of season that Lind did - is hopelessly oversimplified. I think you're playing every bit the fool's game that you think you're calling out.
-
Why are you going on about Gadjovich in response to a post about Madden? Thanks for your crystal ball work where Lind is concerned - if anything my point is that it's pretentious to claim that a player will - or will not - become an NHLer in due course - and here you are responding with Cole Cassells comparables. Lind spent a few months this year injured in his rookie AHL campaign - so well done - you've picked a guy that was also set back by injuries early. In any event I think you're hopelessly oversimplifying things - if I were to do the 'look at their rookie AHL production' thing and believe that it's as solid a predictor of a career as you have, I'd have given up on my favorite Leaf in his first AHL season....turns out that Kapanen aint so bad after all. Anyhow, this is tail chasing material at this point.
-
Is Markstrom now the Elite Goalie he was always projected to be?
oldnews replied to *Buzzsaw*'s topic in Canucks Talk
Depends.... how much weight he gains over the summer? -
Pittsburgh probably feels the same way. In other words - a good hockey trade for both sides. You only get one of Gagner/Spooner - you can't have both - they were dealt for each other = that's one 'mistake' not two. Schaller is a 2 yr deal at 1.9 - in other words a short-term, typical modern day 4th line deal - relatively inconsequential - and hard to be taken seriously when considered a 'mistake'. It's also not a done deal - he could wind up the next MDZ or Nilsson flipped for a late pick - and is serviceable enough as a 4th line placeholder. So really that leaves LE - and there are handfuls of worse deals - one on virtually every competitor in the Pacific.....so what a lot of people consider "mistakes' that Benning has made really need to be considered in the 'bigger picture' as the relatively inevitable cost of doing business. Every GM makes "mistakes" - they wouldn't make any however, if they took no risks - but risk is an inevitable element of the business. People that expect mistake-free GMing - are unrealistic armchairs that aren't honest with themselves about the number of 'mistakes' they themselves would make.
-
Yeah - it's not easy to remain level-headed when you have this dynamic constantly playing out - of (extreme) optimism vs (extremely) negative expectations..... The absolute best of scouts - don't really have a handle on a lof of the prospects out there, let alone be realistically able to provide 'realistic' comparisons of entire prospect pools - it's relative fool's game territory - any person only has so much exposure, information, etc to all those players. And then, even with all the volumes of scouts out there looking for the next NHL asset - guys come out of relative 'nowhere' - as players develop and emerge on really different trajectories - lots of them not necessarily indicating by the time they are 18 yrs old / draft age. If that weren't the case, there wouldn't be handfuls of relatively NHL quality prospects that slip through and wind up being signed as undrafted free agents at the end of each college/CHL/Euro season - years after their draft windows - better players than a fair number of guys that go in the top 30 or 60 in any draft. But we're all suckers for it - have our hunches or observations about guys - get 'fooled' - and there are also those guys that indicate fairly strongly - and keep doing so....I think in Gaudette's draft season, there were probably a fair number of us who were every bit as convinced that Carl Neill could be something special - and a year or two later - not so much. In terms of latent skill in the system though - I think that Madden is one guy that is making a case for himself. Players get 'projected' to have various limits - at age 18 - and yet there is an endless set of examples of players that break those projections - part of the reason I think it's nonsense when I hear claims by the smarmies et al that love to play that fool's game - 'experts' in the making - who also often get outraged when seasoned NHL hockey people move on from players like Shinkaruk, Dahlen or pick your poison / pet project / flavour of the week. I recall the canuckssmarmy articles about Gaudette - wondering how the Canucks could have mistaken the guy for someone worth drafting.... One thing about Madden though that I recall from the draft floor - was how infuriated Stan Bowman appeared when the Canucks took him right before the Hawks pick. He seems like one of those players that some seasoned eyes were strongly drawn to - and appears to be upticking in a way that confirmed their impressions. In other words..."I got a feeling about this guy' lol - think he's gonna be a surprise middle six beast! (jk....I don't fn know).