Thorny
-
Posts
35,303 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Thorny
-
-
I am fairly surprised the older brother of one of our young players is still on the board.
Edit: Ha, right on time. There he goes!
-
Not saying it's a bad pick, just saying I haven't seen or read enough to convince me to pick him here.
Ya, I definitely may have reached a bit. Time will tell on Kilngberg. I am though trying to lean towards youth whenever I can.
-
That one's a bit of a surprise. Not enough of a track record there for me.
LGR, Hoss and Whiskey
Fair enough. Bit of a risky pick, decision based on upside. He had just as good a rookie season as Ekblad though (granted he's a bit older), and he's a young D that could have been nominated for the Calder. That's my reasoning anyways!
-
I select - John Klingberg, D
-
Wow things moving really fast now! Just give me one sec...
I should really take Nick Foligno here, but I'm gonna make a pick on potential upside.
I'll take Jonathan Drouin.
I have to go help build a deck for a bit so hopefully I'm back before my next pick! I'll try to check in if I can.
-
Jaden Schwartz :beer:
I like this pick.
I'll take Mark Stone.
Even though I know we aren't building teams, I'm worried I am subconsciously.
Hall - Eichel - Stone
Nash - Kopitar - xxx
-
I think if you went back and read the thread you'd realize that there really isn't any legitimate talk about Risto being in the trade. Liger has been saying that, since we have a high opinion of O'Reilly, that Risto would be involved in the talks. Others have taken the time that they would NOT trade Risto for him (I don't know anybody that would). That's the extent of the Risto conversation.
nfreeman specifically mentioned Murray possibly including Risto in a deal. That is where some of this is probably stemming from as well.
-
I've supported a ROR trade always but I wouldn't want Risto moved for anything less than a defenseman already playing at or near Risto's ceiling.
This. I'm not giving up Ristolainen in a package in a trade for O'Reilly. We are much deeper in prospective forwards than we are in prospective defense right now. It would be trading our D-man with the highest potential ceiling for a guy, who while very good, is playing a position in which we have more strength.
A package that included Girgensons and Zadorov and the 21st pick would be more reasonable. It is still something I'd hesitate to offer.
I think I would do Grigorenko, Zadorov, and the 21. But, that many of us would make that deal means Colorado will probably ask for more. I think this package would be my personal limit.
-
I think my pick covers a little bit of everything. He's a top D-man now and good for the future. I may have gone with another forward if it was just for value.
Sorry, my post was just referencing your earlier one, wasn't making a point regarding your pick. Ekblad is a good pick. No "c" though. ;)
-
Nail Yakupov, Ryan Murray, Alex Galchenyuk, Morgan Reilly, Hampus Lindholm, Jacob Trouba, Zemgus Girgensons, Cody Ceci, Thomas Wilson, Tomas Hertl and Olli Maatta are the 2012 draftees that have played significant NHL time already.
I would rank Zemgus in the top 5 among those. If that draft were redone today, I think he goes 4th behind Nail, Galchecnyuk and Lindholm.
I will admit I gave him a boost with a desire to build from the center out, but I think he goes in the top 60 if all the NHL GMs were asked to complete this same draft.
Ya, if that draft was redone, I agree that Zemgus goes higher than he went.
I think he's going to be a great center, I like what I've seen out of him. Fun interview too, he pretends to be really shy but he's got a real dry, cocky sense of humor.
Holy crap, I'm up already? I'm not ready.............. So did we decide whether or not we're all building a team or are we just picking who we think is next best in line? In other words I'd like to know if I need to pick a D-man or not. I don't have one.
Just picking players based on value. Not actually building a team based on combining them with your other selected players.
-
Oh, I agree.
Anytime you are taking a player who has a never playd over one who has,it's a risk.
If I'm singling them out, it's because of the suggestion that either was a homer pick.
Speaking of homer picks, four Sabres in the top 60.
4 in the top 60 seems like too many. And it probably is. I love Girgensons but his value isn't the 39th highest of all NHL eligible players.
As far as the other three, while on the surface it appears to be too many, they've played a total of 9 games for the Sabres between them, so it's generally just potential and nothing to be linked with the Sabres failures of the past few seasons.
Do Eichel, Kane and Reinhart deserve to be in the top 60? You can make a good argument for it. Would fans of other teams rank them in the top 60 if they were conducting a similar draft? Eichel - Probably. Kane - Possibly. Reinhart - Maybe, depends how much WJC they saw.
A Blues fan board would probably have Backes in by now. A Leafs board, perhaps a William Nylander.
-
The Reinhart pick is like the Eichel pick — risky, but if you believe the projections good value.
Of course there is some inherent risk to picking any young player, but I wouldn't single these two out.
In regards to Eichel at 9, I think that is hardly riskier than McDavid at 2.
-
Rick Nash and his 42 goals!
-
So wait, you guys are saying that wasn't an exciting game?
I often find low scoring games to be exciting. The problem I have right now is that I am finding it hard to get past the feeling of inevitability I have when watching the Rangers right now. No matter how exciting or non-exciting the games actually are, they are almost always ending 2-1. That is now 7 of their 9 victories that are by the 2-1 score, and 9 of their games overall. Watching the game, it just feels (and lately, rightly so) that the game is going to end 2-1 Rangers, and it's just a matter of time. It's the repetition and seeming inevitability that gets me.
-
What's that? 2-1 Rangers? What a surprise.
-
I'm saying it again: you can set the words to "Sympathy for the Devil" to "Brass Bonanza" and it works perfectly.
Mind = Blown
-
Hockey's Future doing it's annual Spring ranking of the Top 50 NHL prospects. Numbers 10-1 posted today.
Reinhart ranked #1. (Was #8 last time)
-
I agree, you can't really blame the Rangers for their style of play, it is largely effective. It's on the NHL.
-
Hellebuyck would never have been an option. Kasdorf was probably more of a throw in.He looks very solid in net. I think the Jets gave us the wrong goalie in the Myers/Stafford deal. It's not to late to correct that so feel free to send him our way.
GO SABRES!!!
-
I would make a joke about you needing spoiler alert, but we all knew what was coming the second Sean Bean was cast.
Yes. Poor Boromir.
Tampa selects Taylor Hall!
-
A few side notes....
The last youtube in the OP may not be clear. This was Bylsma's first year right before the playoffs. He challenged Crosby to a shootout contest and the loser had to fix and hand out Gatorade to everyone. There is other video of this and Bylsma won, be it 100% on the up and up, or not. The point being, either the head coach or the trumpeted greatest player of a generation would end up being humbled to the point of serving the whole team. I'm sure there are plenty of shennanigans every team does, but that's some pretty good stuff considering who was involved.
On Babcock......I have done some research as well. In EVERY article or video I have seen, he says the exact same thing. "Maximize Potential".
What does "Maximize Potential" mean? Does it mean try as hard as you can? Does it mean be as efficient as you can? What really is someone's potential?
People like to say Terry Pegula is obviously a great buisnessman because he has $4 billion. Terry himself says at a certain point he was broke and had to borrow money from his family to start his own business while in his 30's. "If I ever have more than 2 nickles to rub together, I'll buy the Buffalo Sabres".
At that point in time had Pegula maximized his potential? How many people would say the most efficient move and having maximized your potential would be to have to borrow $7,500 from the people closest to you in order to take a flyer on starting a company when you are broke? Wouldn't the efficient thing to do be to keep at your regular job, work hard and do what you are told, and slowly build year after year?
Pegula didn't do that. He didn't think safe and efficient.....he thought big, and it worked. Is Tim Murray maximizing every trade to make sure he is the sure winner, or does he look at the big prize? Is Rex Ryan safe and efficient? Has he maximized his potential? Or do we not know yet?
Look at the players on the Sabres right now. What is, "maximizing their potential", and how do you let them do it? Do they seem like the type that would work their way through middle management for 20 years and be "efficient"? Or would they say "F' It !!!", and take a shot? I've got pictures of a guy with bricks of Benjamins on a Vegas tower, A 6' 5" 230lb defenseman on the beach with his hot girlfriend when he should have been at practice, a Latvian center that could be the feature at Club Marcella, and a teenage generational player chugging beer for the camera.
I have all the respect in the world for conservative hard work and efficiency. In fact, that's the best course of action many times, and for most people.
I'm just sick of putting the quarter in the slot in the back room of a Times Square newstand year after year....just to watch the metal door go up and down...or to settle for the soccer mom.
It's time to take that good hearted crazy broad out for martinis and lobster and do this thing for real. You may end up crushed at the end, but you will never regret taking the chance... or the ride......
This is a great post. All you have had to say in this thread has been very intriguing. I said before that I would be fine with Disco Dan as the chosen coach, and reading these posts just makes me more fine with it. I don't know that he's a better choice than Babcock, but the fact that a solid argument can be made for Bylsma being potentially the better fit is a statement by itself.
-
What if it end up being the first pick overall.
Giving up our 2016 first to get Tarasenko would include giving up at best a 20% chance of Auston Matthews. I would trade a first round pick, that entails at best a 20% chance at being first overall (if we come in last again) to acquire a player of Tarasenko's caliber.
However, looking at the compensation chart, the Blues would very likely match the number we would offer, that would result in only a first and third being given up as compensation. If I am reading it correctly, the dollar amount required to get Tarasenko would likely result in the compensation we would have to give up being: two firsts, a second and a third.
I would not make that offer.
-
So the Islanders pick is locked in at 21, and the Blues pick we are sending to the Jets is locked in at 25 now, correct?
-
Ah shoot.... so you are tez702? We have identical brackets (CHI over NYR), except you got the advantage on those first-round bonuses! Oh well.
By the way, I too was really pulling for the Caps over the Rags.
Nope I actually am not in the SS league, maybe I can still add myself in? I'll try!
Edit: Yup I was able to join in. My team is dirtymike&theboys (The Other Guys reference). We are tied in points, just behind tez702. Nothing separating mine and your brackets save the Cup winner now!
Hmm..just saw it's not giving my team a rank though. I probably added in too late.
2015 NHL Playoffs: Round 3
in The Aud Club
Posted
What a thriller going on in Anaheim right now! Multiple OT games are the best.