Baggins Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 I must say at first when Benning came in, I was kind of caught up in all his changes, but I have been wondering what GM's like Quinn, and Bowman, Torre, would have done in the Kesler and Kassian debacles........how would have they handled the "trade me to one team" attitude, or how they would have dealt with Kassian..........I just don't see them moving the players the same way........but that is all conjecture......so I guess we will just have to accept those moves. Bowman told Yzerman he was going to move him if he wouldn't play a two way game. He had even started talks with other teams before Yzerman woke up and started putting in a defensive effort. And Yzerman was a 50+ goal/100+ point player. I somehow doubt Kassian would have been here as long as he was were Bowman in charge. I do have a problem with picking up Vey, only because Benning should have taken into account Vey's size, which in my opinion is his only draw back.......20 lbs heavier and he goes where he wants to...........now he is just a perimeter player...with some skill Have you written off Baertschi as well? Both cost a 2nd and both are the same size. Does Baertschi only get one season as well? I think Vey plays a very similar game to the Sedins. I don't have a problem with that. What he is capable of becoming is yet to be seen. Miller would have signed for less and in less years, but Bennings skill is in assessing talent, not contract negotiations......and that is very apparent. Did Miller actually tell you this or you just pulling it out of your butt? Btw, many seem to think the GM negotiates all the deals on his own. They typically don't. Deals are talked over with several on the executive board with often includes a cap expert and a team lawyer. Ultimately it's the GM that signs off on the deal or doesn't (whether he did the actual negotiating himself or not) and gets to take the heat. If Benning was no good at negotiating he wouldn't be the lead negotiator. It's just that simple. I am ok with the signing of Dorsett and Sbisa...just [paid too much........again, others teams are paying less for equivalent players....how's that work? Dorsett maybe. Sbisa not so much. Sbisa's play improved a great deal over the course of the season. At his age if he was signing for less it would be a one year deal not three. The team is gambling he will continue that improvement and by the third year could be a major bargain at that price. That's how longer deals for young players work. They get overpaid in the early year hoping for a bargain in the later year. Last but not least is letting Richardson and Matthais walk for nothing..............and not being able to make tough decisions, such as winning those meaningless games at the end of the season........that cost us! Do you have any idea where ufa's come from? Playoff teams. Playoff teams lose players to free agency every year. Even some non-playoff teams lose players to free agency. Get use to it. You'll never have a playoff run if you trade all your pending fa's every deadline out of fear of losing them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathew Barzal Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Probably not his worst value wise, but I think the Kassian trade will be looked at as one of his worse once the guy comes into his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AboardTheWCE Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 I don't know why Sbisa is getting bashed so much. The guy was thrown into the NHL as an 18 year old, right after being a top-20 pick in his draft year. Tack onto that the fact he was in a bad defensive system in Philly, and quickly traded to the Ducks because Philly gave up on him. Not to mention he played in Switzerland before he was drafted so adapting to the North American game was a difficult one for him. Plus even in Anaheim, he wasn't given a chance to DEVELOP into a defenseman, he was thrown into a different defensive system and was asked to be a top-4 guy right away (not very fair if you ask me). I'll admit, I was skeptical when we got him in the Kesler trade, but he brings a grit and size that people were asking for after the 2011 Cup Finals. He hits and is intimidating. Yes, his analytic stats may not be great, but he makes sure teammates aren't pushed around too much. The fact of the matter is, people are jumping on the bandwagon of "Sbisa sucks". He is young (25) and was learning a new defensive system. I believe he will make huge strides this year, and if paired with Hamhius, they can be a very solid shutdown pairing. As for some people asking for puck-moving defensemen, have you guys looked at Bartkowski? He has grit, but is known for being a guy who can transition the puck up the ice. He also said he was working on shooting more, so hopefully that will translate into more goals (or at least chances for rebounds). He is also young and was close to being a solid top-6 defensemen in Boston before Julien put him in the "doghouse". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hearditall Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Show me some evidence that puts Quick in the elite category. I'm not interested in team stats like cups or wins or gaa. LOL... What do U want baumerman? Regular season stats or Playoff stats? Regular season Sedins are elite players vs Toews. Sedin over Toews in points for the past 5+ years in REGULAR SEASON. Come PLAYOFFS Toews over Sedins period. So what I'm saying is if U haven't caught on yet after losing for over 40+ years, is I'll take a Lucic over Vrbata or a D.Brown over Kassian or W.Mitchell over Y.Weber or Ferklund over ?(some of our softies) or Quick over Miller. Get it, It's about the Playoffs & Stanley Cup not presidents banner... Whether U like it or not JB & TL are building that here. They aren't all about regular season #'s they see the bigger picture like some of us do. Hard not to have learned something after 40+ years. PS. look at the way JB is drafting our future players. Meat potato gritty tough players. people who can elevate their games when needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 LOL... What do U want baumerman? Regular season stats or Playoff stats? Regular season Sedins are elite players vs Toews. Sedin over Toews in points for the past 5+ years in REGULAR SEASON. Come PLAYOFFS Toews over Sedins period. So what I'm saying is if U haven't caught on yet after losing for over 40+ years, is I'll take a Lucic over Vrbata or a D.Brown over Kassian or W.Mitchell over Y.Weber or Ferklund over ?(some of our softies) or Quick over Miller. Get it, It's about the Playoffs & Stanley Cup not presidents banner... Whether U like it or not JB & TL are building that here. They aren't all about regular season #'s they see the bigger picture like some of us do. Hard not to have learned something after 40+ years. PS. look at the way JB is drafting our future players. Meat potato gritty tough players. people who can elevate their games when needed. The fact that you think Ferland is a "playoff player" or an effective player in the NHL shows me that your judgement is far too clouded with emotions. He's a fringe NHLer who will be lucky to play 200 games, but because he got a couple big hits in a few playoff games all of a sudden he is the guy we need to build our team to respond to? Take a step back and get some objectivity. Don't worry after Benning takes us to the bottom we should get some good quality prospects that excel in the playoffs. But don't expect to see Benning as our GM in 2-3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 you're judgement He's a fringe NHLer who will be likely to play in over 200 games Ok there Professor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 Have fun kids. Would you like some pie with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 His honestly sparked fodder for the naysayers and second guessers who all think they have a better inside track on this team than the professionals do. How many of these threads are necessary? Evidently one isn't enough to whine and moan sufficiently; many are required to complain about the same things over and over in as many places as possible. Nice try though, hiding this one with a nebulous title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 Oh course. To win the Conn Smyth you have to play for a good team. In fact, you really need to play for one of the finalists and most commonly you need to play for the Stanley cup winning team. Not only that but the trophy is voted on in the middle of meaningful eliminations games. If a player shows up and plays very well in that one important game he can often sway the emotions of the voters. The Conn Smyth is what it is; a trophy given out hastily from a very small pool of candidates. At this point I have to assume you are off your rocker. So with that said there is no debating with you. Everything about Quick is apparently because of his team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 At this point I have to assume you are off your rocker. So with that said there is no debating with you. Everything about Quick is apparently because of his team. I'm not saying he is a bad goalie. Just that he was an above average goalie and now he is closer to average. And yes, with goalies we need to look at stats and measurements that isolate the position and avoid stats and measurements that are conflated with team influences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 Ok there Professor. Thanks, I enjoy having someone proofreading my comments for me - it saves me some time. Perhaps I could just give you my password and you could clean up my mistakes as soon as you see them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 Thanks, I enjoy having someone proofreading my comments for me - it saves me some time. Perhaps I could just give you my password and you could clean up my mistakes as soon as you see them? You're too busy correcting other people to clean up your own act? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 You're too busy correcting other people to clean up your own act? I don't think I have ever corrected typos, grammar, or spelling mistakes on this forum. I do enough of that grading undergraduate papers. I would rather not do that with my free time. But please continue proofreading my comments for me, it is like I have my own personal secretary on here, unfortunately you won't be paid for your services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 I don't think I have ever corrected typos, grammar, or spelling mistakes on this forum. I do enough of that grading undergraduate papers. I would rather not do that with my free time. But please continue proofreading my comments for me, it is like I have my own personal secretary on here, unfortunately you won't be paid for your services. You need to work on your game. Weak. Fail actually, ironically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 You need to work on your game. Weak. Fail actually, ironically. I must admit that your use of sentence fragments is concerning, especially if you're going to be my proofreading secretary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 I must admit that your use of sentence fragments is concerning, especially if you're going to be my proofreading secretary. For a guy who thinks having a secretary/underling would somehow compensate your manhood, you'd be the one that doesn't realize they're smarter than you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 For a guy who thinks having a secretary/underling would somehow compensate your manhood, you'd be the one that doesn't realize they're smarter than you. I appreciate the straw man fallacy/ad hominem combo, but I think you should stick to the proofreading, logic isn't your forte. In any event, I'm done here. I'll see you next time I make a typo? Thanks for your services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 I appreciate the straw man fallacy/ad hominem combo, but I think you should stick to the proofreading, logic isn't your forte. In any event, I'm done here. I'll see you next time I make a typo? Thanks for your services. Btw, that thing you like to do - your awkward attempt to brag / prop up your self-esteem / 'status' by repeating that "I grade undergraduate papers" thing.....that's what Professors who can't be bothered assign to grad students (wow, you're a grad student, I'm sure everyone is really impressed) - but that doesn't exactly make you any more 'prestigious' than a secretary, just more poorly paid. Your nickname - the "Professor" - is just 'flattery" - in case you needed that spelled out for you. Sympathize with whomever your secretary might be though, if you ever have one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 Btw, that thing you like to do - your awkward attempt to brag / prop up your self-esteem / 'status' by repeating that "I grade undergraduate papers" thing.....that's what Professors who can't be bothered assign to grad students (wow, you're a grad student, I'm sure everyone is really impressed) - but that doesn't exactly make you any more 'prestigious' than a secretary, just more poorly paid. Your nickname - the "Professor" - is just 'flattery" - in case you needed that spelled out for you. Sympathize with whomever your secretary might be though, if you ever have one. I think you missed the joke. I say that in jest because you call me the professor. I think you read into comments a little too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.