Thorny

We might have the C. We certainly won’t have Byrum.

Opportunity indeed missed, I don’t know what’s gotten into me

I think this is sort of a myth. At least as far as how much their desire to “change plans” has been a definitive factor. Like, the idea we aren’t giving these guys time for their plans to take hold, I don’t really buy. Not sure there’s any inherent value in stability if the result aren’t being yielded. Both Botterill and Adams have sort of utilized a longer form approach and really both are using a lot of the same core. It’s not that the plan is changing or that the change itself is somehow destructive, by way of, I dunno, needing a re-mould of roster to fit said new plan, in reality what’s actually happening is each GM feeling they need to trade away disgruntled star players, which resets the timeline (convenient). Even if you disregard the convenience, the issue isn’t “changing plans” it’s disgruntled star players by way of never winning. Botterill reset his timeline with ROR and Adams did it with Eichel. So I suppose the “deconstructing and reconstructing” part is the most important. But it’s also important to draw the distinction I am because merely “sticking with” Adams and his plan won’t yield extra results if you aren’t winning, just cause you stuck with it. The players didn’t become disgruntled because we changed plans we “changed plans” because they became disgruntled. That’ll still happen if the plan isn’t working, regardless of its seniority. Don’t stick with it just to stick with it. Don’t make avoid making a change just to avoid making a change. You stick with it if you believe it will yield results. And if they DO bring in a new GM at some point, it need not be another “reset the timeline” guy. Perhaps if their focus is on immediate winning this could be the case.

Conviction isn’t the right word. He absolutely believed we could make the playoffs. He absolutely drank some of the kool-aid of last year’s finish and honestly, if I take off my “analyze these guys on a professional level because they are professionals” hat for a moment, I actually get it: Trend line was pointing to a playoff berth by doing nothing. It’s ok to say the quiet part out loud But that’s not the point. Playoffs could have been possible, even likely, but Adams could have done more to make it a lock. You can argue he shouldn’t have, but you can’t argue reasonably he couldn’t have. It’s an issue of strategy, not conviction. It’s not about whether you think we’ll make the playoffs. How much do you want to make the playoffs? How many failsafes do you believe your current roster needs and how many are you willing to implement? No stone unturned.

Yes. Basically, based on the current construction of the roster, Adams believe playoffs remain possible today even while the active prioritization is tomorrow. It’s not that he doesn’t care about winning now, or doesn’t make moves to win now, it’s just that if there’s a conflict of interest during the process, between longer term and immediate interests, the long term interests are currently still always the definitive decision making factor. People might think it’s the proper way to do it, the strategy will have its proponents, but I think it’s pretty accurate to say that more could be done for the now if some of the perceived future was sacrificed. Where my opinion comes in is, I think they should do it. tldr - trade more draft picks

Hard to say with skills sets. Most important is definitely durability. Then I’d say players who don’t rely on speed are most likely to keep up. Size…who knows. Sometimes it’s harder for those big bodies to keep up

Damn do you have specifics on which deals were nixed that Adams had completed?

Adams is the guy who specifically signed up for the “I will fire those guys, I can do it with less” plan. Part and parcel. Pegula’s strategy is Adams strategy is Pegula’s strategy. Pegula picked Adams *because* he was amendable to the skill set he was looking for in a GM. Spending to the cap is one thing, but the value we’d have gained from being used as a broker or retaining is not negligible but also not particularly noteworthy either in the grand scheme of all the potential avenues to construct a team. An extra pick or two, for a GM already reluctant to trade picks. We aren’t lacking pick/prospect currency to make moves, we have an abundance, there’s no way the loss of an asset or two presented an obstacle to making the playoffs because it didn’t present an obstacle to making trades A bad team will make the playoffs this year. Pegula sucks but he doesn’t present an obstacle to making the playoffs because making the playoffs isn’t hard

No I disagree. It’s probably close to the beginning of the end. NHL prime for forwards is statistically ~23-24 I’m not saying he won’t be a good player for a good while longer, but speaking specifically of prime years it’s quite unlikely they’ll be found within any year where his age starts with a 3.

Thomson was such a relatively late bloomer that I feel like we can already see the horizon of the end of his prime and it just started. Almost always a drop off once you near 30 Was always difficult reading posts projecting out our top line from last year like 4 years into the future for when Benson and Co are in theirs. More likely we hope the top line last year can shift gracefully into a line 2. Though, people already want Skinner gone. It’s tough to let a season like last for our forwards go to waste.

Plenty of courage I see…not a bad mind either. There’s talent, oh yes…and a thirst to prove themselves. But where to put them for next year?

Professional nhl teams already paying the guys big contracts worth millions of dollars also don’t devote entire seasons to learning one particular aspect of hockey. I don’t get that idea also maybe a kindly mod could merge these postings

A declaration to fans who just don’t have the ability to see the big picture like *you* do, that they aren’t smart enough to see the “pretty obvious” path we are on. The best type of post imo. The type that’s literally bursting at the seams with excitement at the prospect of chastising fans in the future

This is a definite negative/potential pitfall of this particular type of strategy

That’s what I was mentioning before. There’s probably as strong or stronger a correlation be strong prospect pool and nhl failure going forward than success. It’s provably predictive, just not in the way we like

Well, technically what Adams preached is a perennial Cup contender ie just getting into the playoffs isn’t good enough. Ie we are sacrificing all this development time under the scenario where that’s the price we pay for greatness. So one could make the argument that if we spent all this extra time prioritizing the future over the now only to become a perennial playoff team, the strategy failed by the prism of its own standards. Certainly, making the playoffs and taking 5 years to do it isn’t “job well done”, now. Shouldn’t take that long and the expectation was to make it this year. But honestly, I’m willing to write off the “perennial cup contender” stuff as media jargon, and the whole thing as spin in the name of job security. At the end of the day we want the exact same thing as *every* team and spinning the way you’ll get to it probably amounts to bet-hedging in the end. I’m happy judging by a more league-relative standard. I don’t need greatness from the plan, I just need league relative competence. I’ll happily take a “mere” playoff team. As mentioned - that should have been this year. Did the plan fail this year? Yes. Do I think it’s solid enough to the extent it could succeed, to the tune of a playoff berth, if we stick with it? Yes. I’ve said it a lot: Adams should get next year. But that doesn’t mean the strategy should stagnate. It should be ever evolving and a greater aggressiveness is strictly necessary for next season when imo Adams is definitively on the hottest of seats

Typo. Should just say picks. The contention with Murray was always his dealing of picks not prospects. And I’ve posted the research on here a few times for anyone who actually wants to look it up: Botterill traded more than he brought in relative to Murray and Murray made more picks.

Did Matthews relocate?

Even in Junior he was seen as a more staight-forward type player. Perhaps that pointed to a lack of IQ awareness / playmaking. He has his stretches where he excels in that area but his raw physical traits have always been his best asset

Nah Reinhart called Adams to say thank you which was thoroughly detailed in that beyond blue and gold so we’re good

First Krueger year, right? Though I guess we’re in the 4th Donny year so whatever

I find I’m in the crazy pills minority know this: he hit him DIRECTLY in the head. I thought it was a good call. Probably makes contact even without the lean

I was a Reinhart guy and 55 still looks insane next to his name

Lundell was right there but Quinn looks good Hell Reinhart was right there