Thorny

Terrible list Is that Quinn as in Hughes? I don't really have a problem with any of the forwards listed ahead of Jack, even if I disagree with a few. But those D are no bueno. Centres are more valuable, and even that's only what I'd go to, as a decider, if the talent was close.

Video gaming, the one area Mittelstadt may project out higher than Cozens...

Also Rocky Balboa is a damn good movie. Highly recommend to anyone that hasn't seen it.

Tommy freaking Gunn is last by a mile, poll reflects that accurately. I know it's not the "best" movie but Drago to me is his most iconic, best opponent. The training contrast is excellent and Rocky to me is at his physical best in that movie - he looks it, and he drops Drago even though he's doping. There are lots of iconic lines in the movie but this may be my favourite exchange:

Ya, we are seeing the lines pretty much exactly the same way. Also, I know VO has played on the right and I don't think Skinner has.

I guess it comes down to the prism you want to view the numbers through. Bold sounds pretty good, but another way of looking at it is, he's failed to exceed 27 points in 3 of the last 4 years (12, 27, 41, 15) averaging 24 points over that span. Prorating for the lockout and leaving out his 30 game rookie year like I believe you did in the analysis, he averaged 38 points over the 4 years previous. So it's more like a tale of two halves, with a significant tail-off in the most recent 4 years save that one outlier. It's not a great trend, that's not to say he can't buck it, but it mus

I kinda feel the same way, but that's the luxury of Jack - especially with another potential all-world level player on his left - I think even though VO may not technically be "ready" for that spot on the right, it may still be the way our team is best maximized. I actually think he'd be more likely to hurt us if he was further down the lineup and being counted on for more. With JE and TH he shouldn't have to play much D and he can solely be a finisher. IMO he absolutely needs to be with Jack or Eric and my thought is we'd unlock more from Reinhart asking him to do more on line 2. N

^ And without a proper centre, and probably even with, I think Ralph was wrong on that front - I think it's Reinhart.

Well it's a trend he needs to reverse. 93rd puts him at a top level 4C, and last season he'd be below even that.

^ If I had my way I'd go: Hall - Eichel - Olofsson Skinner - Staal - Reinhart Thompson - Eakin - Cozens Girgensons - Lazar - Okposo ..as I think that moves it from an all world top line to a potential all world top 6. I really like that top 6 and the matchups a Skinner-Reinhart pairing on line 2 could lead to. It's less balanced than the other lines I proposed but if Eakin is reasonable at 3C I think the F could be something special.

Do we know that? Olofsson was the 1LW last year. The starting assumption should maybe be that he's the 2LW on the depth chart. As mentioned I have him at 1RW but that's my configuration. If we are going with Krueger, VO is ahead of Skinner on the left. You end up moving him to the top 6 though which addresses that putrid 3rd line, which was the biggest issue with the proposed, so that's good. - - - We shouldn't be surprised if his treatment of Skinner continues and it ends up something like: Hall - Eichel - Reinhart Olofsson - Staal - Cozens Skinner - Eak

What is the point in comparing Larsson and Casey on points when that is the exact opposite role we asked of Larsson? Totally different players. Your point about unrealistic expectations for Casey is a salient one, though.

We may not be better than last year if the OP has the correct lines I think Olofsson ends up on the top line but what you propose looks a ton better imo than the lineup first proposed in the thread.

I hear what you are saying @dudacek and maybe it's true and Adams does "want" an upgrade in net, but it's a do-or-do-not situation in my estimation.

😆 Ya, I phrased it pretty poorly. I was more trying to say that one's favourite time period often but of course not always corresponds to the circumstances surrounding when/how they watched it. I was a bit too young for that during the Attitude Era but basically my entire junior high school was massively into it. WWE has never been close to as mainstream popular as it was during that era. It was really fun.