Thorny

Also:

Unlikely to find a timid marine relative to a civilian. Timidness in a marine relative to other marines might still be a consideration These players are all very good at what they do. Greatness is longevity and the marathon allows even some apparently strong to fall by the wayside relatively There are definitely inferior doctors. Whether that comes down to intelligence is anyones guess but I’d imagine it’s a spectrum like anything else

The thing about Matthews is he was nominated for the Selke, too. So he’s better defensively than the other points guys, he scores way more goals than any of them, and he’s as good or better at even strength? I don’t see how he’s not top 3 he doesn’t have to win but 69 goals and Selke level D NOT being nominated seems truly absurd imo I think he missed a nom by not hitting 70. I think he might have missed because of that arbitrary factor. He’s literally the same guy at 69 but I think that could he a reason

Need Carolina to win this so the series is watchable

Matthews outscored McDavid this year when considering 5 V 5 primary points. So, goals and primary assists 5 V 5. Matthews had 38 g and 17a 55 points McDavid had 19 g and 32a for 51 points. I don’t think it’s a mark of Matthews being selfish, he’s a better player provably at even strength, especially cause his D is Selke level this year apparently McDavid’s advantage is on the power play and secondary helpers

Not at his cap hit

As long as it’s not a dogfight to reach a long term contract Specifically

There’s WAY too many people who talk hockey to generalize here though. It depends on the analyst Yes even after focusing on just the “credible” ones Also the draft comparables on tsn’s draft show for example are always the hall of fame guys and or superstars. Surely there are other players below that level that compare stylistically. They aren’t stupid, they know what they are doing. It’s just selling the product. I understand why they do it. I anecdotally do feel like a lot of people take the comps pretty literally for expectation. Skinner was just referenced in this way. As sort of a reasonably achievable level for an average first round prospect. Last year Thompson was Eric Lindros in a conversation I had on here

And I’d do it again

Might be something they’d say, though You forgot rule number 1

Thankfully a draft pick comes with as many or more question marks. 11 is a very good asset when combined in a package. There’ll be some intriguing options out there

That’s a good theory, in practice that’s not how it’s being interpreted

Didn’t say you did. There is an eternal mystery box aspect to prospects that leads to overstated comparisons (not saying you) that is undeniable, though, just speaking to that. The actual nhl production thus often undervalued. This is something that no doubt exists, it’s ingrained in the entertainment aspect of the whole production watch sportsnet on draft day and you’ll see: every player has an nhl comp or either nik lidstrom or jaromir Jagr if you polled 100 random fans whether they’d be disappointed if pick 11 had the career of skinner I’d bet over half would say yes

Players that are better get paid more. Hope that helps. - - - His contract will be 15% of the cap next season. Pastrnak’s is 14% wooooooOOOoooooOooo my online GM simulator broke! It does not compute!

Skinner is top 10 in even strength goals league wide, over the course of the last *10 years.* He has nearly 400 goals. Very few nhl players have no flaws. To think we can draft some rando at 11, throw them in Rochester for 3 years and get ourselves an upgraded version of Skinner just blows my mind. Maybe an upgrade on who Skinner is in 3 years, but if that’s the argument that’s not really saying much of anything

Skinner probably represents closer to a ceiling

Sabres have no room for the best scorer in a generation and maybe ever at even strength and a guy who’s pretty good but not yet exceptional in the playoffs Being pretty good in the playoffs? That’s beneath us we’re more of a “first exit pass rate per 60 relative to expected goals at 5 V 5 for all players under 22” type treasure hunters. Find the one obscure stat that fits the narrative and chalk the rest up to vague intangibles

The Utah YetTAY

No room for the best goal scorer of a generation

I think Crosby played under Ruff with team Canada at some point! this is all I care about now

Probably. But we never got to see all those players together while they were in their prime so it’s an interesting thought experiment

Lol reading comprehension again. I’m not using BPA in a drafting context, here. You’ve been attempting to have an argument with me for a few hours that I’m legitimately not having haha. It’s my fault as well, I shouldn’t have even used the term “ROSTER bpa” because it invited confusion: my point was it should be the best players we can ice (up to and including transactions we might make), rather than actively looking to find spots for rookies. They should absolutely be in the mix, but as I stated (I hoped it would make sense): the youth should have to force their way on. Yes, “best” still necessarily accounts for mix and a wanting to have a well balanced team Proper nhl depth results in rookies needing to bypass appropriate competition and also provides injury insurance

The ROSTER should be BPA. if a kid is good enough he can force his way on outright. I wasn’t saying “kids as depth” i was saying “don’t be afraid to assemble nhl depth” as it helps withstand injuries

If there’s a team that would prove BPA the rule it’s buffalo by taking an offensively focused D-man when we already have two #1 overalls on the roster and a #3 overall on the roster in the same mold. I wouldn’t do it but it would be gutsy

Yes. Nothing I said was even disagreeing with that. My post was about having nhl depth