khay

He's a child in a man's body. He has always been like that. He was a decent hockey player but not someone deserving of respect. Other than the cup, which is a team award, he has 0 personal accolade.

Funny thing is Boston lost to Blues last season in game 7 similar to the way we lost game 7 in 2011. They just couldn't get anything working, the other team figured you out and was very efficient in defending, with a hot goalie backing them up. In my opinion, we had to win that series before game 7 and I think of game 3 Rome hit as the turning point. Before that hit, Boston was the team that had nothing going. It almost looked like we were on our way to a 1-0 or 2-1 win in that game. After that hit, Boston ramped up the physical plays (some borderline cheap and dirty) and they found a way. Us on the other had, still couldn't get things going and Boston's defence got more proficient as the series went on. Bottom line is that we had a great core but we didn't have a game breaker that could have single handedly win you a game when nothing is going right. What makes me hopeful about the current team is that we have some potential game breakers. EP, Hughes, maybe Boeser, Bo with bull rush, and even Hoglander. Can't wait for the season to resume. Hopefully it will.

This kid is going to be at least as good as William Nylander but with more bite to his game.

The stated benefit of doing this is that it keeps NHL relevant... That's just a pathetic reason to force the draft in June. This is going to force teams to make decisions without doing due diligence. Interviewing prospects face-to-face or to evaluate them without draft combine (for what it's worth). And there's no rush to draft these guys until the season resumes anyways. And the very problem of trading current roster players only for them to come back and join the former team for playoff run (if the season resumes)? I just don't see the benefit of doing this and it only creates a mess for the teams and the league moving forward. I seriously wonder whose idea this was. It's just damn stupid.

Sadly, you do have a point there.

In recent history, was there any case where one ethnic group was happy to be ruled by another ethnic group? I highly doubt NK citizens will be happy. I get the sense that they are too proud to accept Chinese rule. China can't even keep Uyghurs happy.

It's going to introduce a lot of social problems and it will take a while before things get better. Yes, the re-unification is not going to be perfect but still it's the best scenario IMO. Maybe it shouldn't be Germany style, where the borders just opened up all of a sudden but something that is more gradual. The uproar from China conquering NK and the conflicts that stem from it is going to bring way too much instability to that region. In some sense, it's going to be bring more instability to that region than it has now. South Koreans are going to want their land back, China isn't going to give it up... It's not going to end well if China takes over NK. I don't get the sense that Koreans want help from Japan. If anything, Koreans are probably hoping that Japan doesn't use this as an opportunity to amend their constitution (article 9: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_9_of_the_Japanese_Constitution).

I hope not to WWIII. And you are right, there's more benefit to having peace than war. But you never know what desperate leaders like Xi and Abe will do (I don't under estimate Japan's ambition in this matter).

I agree, in particular the bolded. They are not likely to accept a female leader, although it looks like she has been trained to be the next one. And there will be unrest. China will make a move, they probably already bought off a lot of the high ranking officials. South Korea and it's leader put in a lot of effort towards peaceful re-unification so they won't let China take over so easily. And obviously, US has significant interest in that region. Japan and Abe regime will surely use this opportunity to their advantage. Russia might get involved as well. The best scenario is East-West Germany style re-unification although I highly doubt China will go away quietly and I suspect Abe is going to use it as an opportunity to change the constitution.

KJU assassinated this kid's dad though. My money is on KJU's sister being the next in line.

This makes the most sense. China attempting to annex would cause a huge uproar, possibly WWIII.

Agree. What do you call young assets that didn't work? Overaged AHLers, KHLers, SHLers. Above poster that you were responding to, claiming that you still end up with young assets is false. What do you call a team full of young assets without complementary players? Edmonton Oilers. Yes, JB shouldn't have signed Eriksson but no team wins without contributing vets.

Realistically, yes. We just let go of Tanev, use that money to sign Toffoli. But that leaves a big hole on RHD. If we want both Tanev and Toffoli, either Eriksson or Sutter + Baer needs to come off the book.

I agree with this post but I do wonder, what was said after the defeat? They were cheaper/dirtier than us? Or simply that they were better than us? Or they were lucky and we weren't? The last one would best describe what happened in game 7 I guess and hence, why we lost. Or that they accepted what happened and said nothing? Was it the case that less "excuses" were given at the time because the means for communication isn't as broad as it is now where the media is constantly around the players and tweets every single thing they say instantaneously? I do agree that 1994 team was better suited for the playoffs and had more durable players compared to 2011 team. They had more heart and the top players delivered in 1994. Hockey has definitely changed over the years but the team with more heart can always find a way to make up for the difference in skill in the playoffs.

What? how?

Each player has a different trajectory because each player has a different starting point, due mainly to genetics. If you think of NHL career as a marathon, Matthews' started the race at the front of the crowd because he already matured into full framed body at age 18. EP started the race in the middle because he had to build his body up first. So not only Matthews 1 year older but he is at least 2-3 years ahead of EP in the development trajectory (starting at the front with full body vs starting in the middle due to still maturing body). There's no denying that the two players come with amazing skillset and in EP's case, desire to win that Matthews may not be able to match. This may ultimately lead EP to surpass Matthews when both are at their peaks. Look at Toronto, people are already talking about what caused their rebuild to veer off course and compare to Vancouver, where everyone is saying, how did they accelerate the rebuild so quick (EP + Hughes + smart trades). I'm going to digress a bit and say that Toronto's rebuild veered off course due to Tavares signing causing constraint on the cap as well as signing Nylander to a lucrative contract rather than trading him for defensive help, and only exacerbated by trading Kadri, one player that played feisty, did the dirty work, and checked the opposition's best players for an offensive defenceman that doesn't play much defence. /digression Look at David Pastrnak for EP's comparison. He was a skinny kid, weighing at around 170 pounds. His first two seasons were OK, showed that he is an NHLer but it was far from clear if he was on his way to becoming an elite player. EP was and still is a skinny kid, weighed around 160 at the draft and now about 175 pounds. And you look at his first two seasons, what he was able to do without a fully mature body and everyone can see that he is not only an NHLer but an elite NHLer on his way to HHOF. I look at EP and see a player that is eclipsing Pastrnak's development trajectory and is a two-way center to boot. Next season, he will be around 180-190 pounds, he will be stronger and will be able to get his lethal shots off quicker and they will be harder for the goalies to react to. I don't think 40+ goals is out of question for EP. I look at Matthews and see a great goal scorer, he may turn out to be the best goal scorer amongst the players in his generation, succeeding Ovi, although Matthews won't have quite as big gap as Ovi did against his peers. But the cup is not won by one player scoring 60 goals in the regular season. I think it's players like EP that plays hard at all times, that will score big goals that win you the cup.

Got it. lol, can't believe I didn't get it sooner.

Why is that? From talking to some Swedish people, I think Detroit was the most popular team for many Swedish hockey fans. I'm sure these players grew up watching the Red Wings. And Vancouver with its history of Swedish players... I'm not surprised that it's between Vancouver and Detroit.

I love the idea of bringing back Tryamkin but he is not going to replace Tanev. Tryamkin is a huge upgrade over Stecher and will probably cost less. I'd say we need to re-sign Tanev, hopefully it's no more than 5M and not too long of a contract.

At this point, it would be absurd if we didn't try to sign him. Stecher is going to ask for a raise and he probably deserves a raise but paying 3+ million dollars for a defenceman that doesn't bring complementary skillset to the team is not a smart use of the cap. And with Stecher gone, there is going to be one spot open for RHD for Tryamkin and perhaps Rafferty to fight over. I think Tryamkin brings exactly the type of skillset that is lacking on the defence at the moment. Physicality, crease clearing, and intimidation. And he is mobile for man his size. Obviously, NHL forwards are far more skilled and faster but the rink is also smaller so he doesn't have to cover as much ice. For example, I noticed him skating from one side of the ice to another side to forecheck in that video... I guess that on a larger ice, someone has to always be pressuring the puck carrier to slow the puck down but you almost never see a defenceman leaving his position to forecheck in the NHL, well unless the puck carrier is right in front of you or puck is loose in your side of the ice. Edler-Myers Hughes-Tanev Fantenberg-Tryamkin Benn-Rafferty Signing Tryamkin would be the cheapest way to improve the defence especially with basically no cap space left if we want to re-sign Toffoli and Tanev.

This is actually a good idea and will be a great way to piss off Bettman. But we don't need compliance buyout to execute this idea. Sign Marky to 100 years 100 million dollar contract. Buyout works as follows (as per https://www.capfriendly.com/buyout-faq): This allows us to spread 2/3 of 100 mil = 66 mil over 200 years, which is 0.33 M cap hit per season. We re-sign Marky to league minimum contract over the next 5 season. This way Marky still makes his dough, we keep him at around 1M cap. I'm sure this violates many rules of the NHL and Bettman will intervene, but it's fun to think about. Btw, I don't think compliance buyout allows teams to re-sign a player they just bought out (as per https://www.capfriendly.com/buyout-faq):

I actually think if there is CB, there will only be 1 this time as opposed to 2. Two CBs were necessary last time due to introduction of cap for the first time, which was set quite low compared to the salary levels at that time. Eriksson for sure. It will give us immediate cap relief to sign both Tanev and Toffoli. Myers is serviceable and will be serviceable for the next couple of seasons and will carry a positive trade value IMO. Although you are right that in year 4 of his contract, he might have negative value much like Eriksson, I think it's only a potential problem at this point as no one can see the future. Maybe Myers will become more stable as years go on, you never know.

It would be great if someone as smart as you could educate us CDC morons. Please teach us the names of some of the popular NHL systems and their characteristics, and finally, what system Green uses. Thanks in advance!

That's basically a 4 first rounders since Foote and Millter are former first round picks. But to be fair, since they acquired the first rounder from us for trading Miller, it's more like trading 2 former first rounders Miller + Foote for Blake Coleman and 1 first rounder for Barclay Goodrow. One can argue that they needed to trade Miller to make room for Point so you can think of Foote as a sweetener to dump Miller's salary whilst getting a good roster player back. From TBL's point of view, Miller was a 3rd liner so Coleman replaces Miller at 1/4th of the price. Little did they know of Miller's true upside as we are enjoying this season. TBL has the feel of 2009-2013 Vancouver Canucks. Great regular season team, well coached, great goaltending and stars, but not able to win the ultimate trophy whilst trading away 1st round picks and prospects to build depth for a cup run but also leading to a bare farm. I guess one difference is they have #1D and better stars than the Canucks did so perhaps they might get there.

Marky would get my vote then it would be Petey. Btw, there are so many things wrong with this article. First, although that GAR of 24 goals is indeed impressive, a real statistician would and should report confidence interval instead of a single point estimate. Second, one-man band? Canucks have Hughes, Miller, Markstrom, Bo, etc. NYR has awesome young top 4, Zibanejad, Kreider, and good young goalie that has taken over from Lundqvist. Finally, I thought EP is 2 years behind and 3 years behind McDavid in terms of NHL experience. I guess the writer might be referring to draft year but I'm not sure if that is a fair comparison of players' development arcs especially if he wants to use it to compare salary ranges. Overall, I think that's a poorly written article with very little research.