LTS
-
Posts
8,905 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by LTS
-
Risto benched for the end of the game. Message being sent.
-
Oh Lord. They are in full on mess mode.
-
Risto needs some pine time.
-
Nice! Nice! Nice!
-
Indeed. They just showed Jack talking to the ref and I'm sure he's saying the same thing.
-
This period has been much better. BUT, they have a long way to go. Still giving up too many opportunities. Gotta win though, so hope they keep it up.
-
So no holding call against Okposo and then Buffalo gets the shaft on the call. How in the absolute HELL do they not get a penalty for that?
-
I'm on the Antipin train. I like what I'm seeing from him. Subtle plays that make things happen.
-
Oh... And can I see a Kane vs. Domi fight tonight? I'd love that.
-
That's a perfect counter play. Nicely done.
-
I can't get the Bills game. And from what I see in the score I'm not missing anything.
-
Ok. Well they didn't look too good but if you can get out tied then it's something. Also... Someone tell the Bills they have to play football.
-
A lot wrong on that goal but if Risto doesn't have his head up his arse that's not a goal.
-
Neither team wants to own the basement as they are playing like it.
-
They have elevated the team higher than they'd be now without them. The depths they sank to shouldn't be underestimated. They needed a lot to build them up. If the players acquired improve the team next year then it's still successful even if it doesn't meet your timeline, or mine, or anyone's.
-
You have a little bit of control on when contracts hit, sure. It's just not the same level of control. At the same time, no one wins without having a few veterans in the lineup who can help guide the youth. So at some point you need to move something to get them unless you want your veteran leaders on the 4th line. I agree players are evaluated all the time as well. It's also sometimes hard to evaluate some players when they are in a bad environment. As for removing Murray. I don't think moving Murray boiled down to his performance as a talent evaluator which is what we are discussing here. His ability to run an organization certainly wasn't up to snuff and that's why he was let go. I think we can all pretty much say with little doubt that the players wanted Murray and Bylsma gone and Pegula had little choice but to comply. Especially if a major part of that voice is your "generational" talent.
-
<Obligatory Kane/Eichel Complaint> I covered it for everyone.
-
So, we have Skype for Business at work. We also have a dial-in conference line. (Skype has its own dial-in line as well). So what I enjoy is that we use Skype and the non-Skype dial-in and so for meetings we have to listen to beeps interrupt the call and people asking who's on... whereas if we'd just use Skype it shows the name of everyone in the meeting. And as I said.. they set up Skype conference and the dial-in but still ask who is connecting. In a 30 minute meeting this process of identifying who is on the call takes 5-10 minutes. Hooray for us.
-
Coyotes goalie name: Wedgewood. Is he woody or wedgie in the locker room? :)
-
Why can't you do that? And again, you keep talking about games played. A crappy 4th line player could play 100 games and it wouldn't help the franchise. I would focus more on top 6 and top 4 d and how likely they end up in those slots. If you draft 10 players and combined they have a 10% chance of making it. Then if 20% of them make it how would that not be above average? In the example above one would anticipate that Nylander should make top 6, he's the best odds to do so. The rest are all long shots, but if they make it then shouldn't that be considered a success? One other thing you are not taking into consideration is that having a team of players all drafted from 2-3 years means you have contract negotiations that are all around the same time. As such, when they call come due you end up having to move assets because you likely can't take on ALL that new salary at once. Remove Kane and O'Reilly and add another 3-4 20-23 year olds on this team and you have a contract nightmare, especially if they all perform. Your only option, besides praying for an increased salary cap is to then trade away those assets. So, you end up not having some of them anyway. At this point it's all speculation. Therefore it is wrong to and unsupportable at this time to cast current judgment on something that has not played out yet.
-
Hooray! A hockey game! If these two games were next week then they'd overlap even more. So at least the scheduling gods gave you some extra time to watch both.
-
The Russian Sweaters look the same except the letters are in a different order.
-
Taking Sam and Jack out of the equation for now and using the Cullen chart. Guide: Player Name (draft pick) - % to play 100 / % to be top 6F, top 4D, or 1G / 4th line or fringe player Lemieux (31) - 29% / 11% / 85% Cornel (44) - 41% / 13% / 73% Karabacek (49) - 34% / 11% / 82% Martin (74) - 27% / 8% / 86% Nylander (8) - 71% / 29% / 46% Guhle (51) 33% / 10% / 82% Borgen (92) 24% / 5% / 90% Asplund (33) 29% / 11% / 85% Pu (69) 32% / 8% / 87% Fitzgerald (86) 25% / 7% / 90% Glotov (190) 9% / 2% / 97% Based on those picks there is an average 32% chance that his picks play 100 games, 10% chance they are top 6/top 4, and 82% that are fringe. There are 11 picks so each player represents a chance at being above or below the average. So, if 4 players make 100 games it's above average for those picks. If 2 players make top 6 or top 4 it's above average and if 10 players are fringe he's above average. There are actually quite a few more picks as we know. Let's see how they pan out over their careers and check back on his success (above or below). I'm not worried just about games played. By rights those players shouldn't even be a top 6 forward or top 4 d. If Guhle and Nylander make it into that category then by definition of the draft chart he's above average in the league. BTW: If I am not thinking of this correctly I am happy to hear so.
-
Maybe I am missing something... The article you link judges the draft position picked to gauge the CAREER value of a player. Then you turn around and use that to assess players who haven't finished their CAREER? How does that work? Are you saying because Guhle, Pu, Asplund, and Nylander are barely scratching the start of their careers that Murray is a failure because those players have only played 7 games? Until those players bust from the game and retire you can't judge what they've accomplished... As for Lemieux... you assume wasted. That trade brought Kane and Bogosian. So a few things there. 1. Kane has been valuable to the team. 2. If Kane is flipped (albeit by another GM) for assets that benefit the Sabres (say a top 4 D) then that move was essentially moving Lemieux (and others) and ending up with a top 4 D later. Again, how do you judge the final value? Finally, judging any single move in isolation if it is indeed a failed move would make everyone a failure. It's an aggregate body of work that can't be fully judged at this point.
-
So if the picks he made as GM of the Sabres are panning out and on the roster in the next 3-4 years do we still call him a failure because he didn't turn the abhorrent team around in a short time frame? There is more to Murray than Ottawa and that would be.... This... he also did the same in Anaheim and it was noted as being largely his ability to sniff out that talent. You can continue to deny his ability or you can give him the credit he deserves while still acknowledging that he might have failed in Buffalo. Again, a GM's contribution is not usually seen in the immediate results. Just like a startup moves onto a more conditioned leader once they are out of start up mode. There are management styles for every level of growth and success. How many times do you see one GM put together the prospects of a team but can't get over that last hump and they bring in another person who brings it home. Who did most of the work? The new guy? Not quite.
