PerreaultForever

I don't really think so. We are sailing in the same direction, I'm just moving along slowly, watching everything carefully, and you are racing ahead blindly. Watch out for the rocks. I'm simply not a blind faith guy who believes in hope and maybes any more. After all the failure, I'm a cautious show me kind of guy, but it's still in the same direction.

Marginally better than Tokarski. That's what I expect. Goaltending will be an issue and a frequent point of complaint for people this season.

So are we hoping for a Sweden Chechia final?

That would be a question wouldn't it? There's been debates here for years arguing about whether or not players would come here or want to come here. Some of this 10 team no trade stuff has I imagine shifted that argument to the "nobody wants to come here" side. Nobody worth anything anyway. So if that's true, and it might be, we definitely have to start winning and the sooner the better. I said this in the Kane thread but I really do believe getting Kane to come here to finish his career would go a long way to solving that problem. Sign him, start winning more and have him publicly talking about how he loves it here and welcome to the new era of greatness. I think it would be just that simple.

I will, but maybe not so quick to the "all in". Remember when we started 10-0 and everybody was proclaiming we had arrived? I got fooled badly there. Maybe you did too. It's going to take seeing some damn good hockey to get me on the bandwagon again. I think if we start strong, I will be cautiously optimistic, and that's about it.

With all due respect, wtf does this mean?

That's all you can ask for? How about a return to a team that wins hockey games more than loses them? A team that competes every night. A team that shows pride in the jersey and plays hard every night for the fans. A winner. Like we used to have. That's what I can ask for. Every time we change direction there's a new plan and new optimism. The KA version isn't the first time things have looked good on paper. I'm not pessimistic, I'm just not going to jump on the bandwagon again based on possibility or on faith. As the saying goes, just win baby, just win.

Oh that's definitely the plan, and it is possible, but as always, it depends on how well they drafted. How many of these guys develop, how fast and how good? I guess I'm more concerned with winning sooner and creating a winning environment. A culture where losing is considered unacceptable or failure. I'm worried if we go too slow and wait too long we create another wave of players that get used to losing and thinking next year or next team. Unlike KA, I felt we had enough young talent now that if we just added a few pieces we could compete now (like L.A. did). KA, I think, has a longer time plan and is quite happy to get a shot at Bedard etc.

I'm not really disagreeing with you and it's absolutely true, we don't know what many of those players will become. I guess really my fear is this team has gone too far in the opposite direction from the earlier failed tries. While I agree with building through the draft, KA is like the anti-Murray in that he doesn't bring in anybody of note and is all in on the draft picks (while as we know Murray squandered them all for guys he thought could make us win right away). This is the plan that takes a LONG time. I'm looking at the Rangers, Carolina, L.A. to some extent. Adding a few key veterans to plug holes now and balance the roster and thus be good faster, while still building long term with the draft. I think it's a better approach.

I think we might have a difference in what we consider serious contender to mean. So first, by 2 years after this year you mean in 3 years, not 2. That takes us a bit closer (potentially) but still not sure serious would apply. If by "serious contender" you mean making the playoffs, sure, it's possible. I certainly hope so. But serious contender to me is only a half a dozen teams at best. There's a few long shots that could pull an upset, but really only a few teams have a serious shot and we are unlikely to be in that group any time soon. If everything, and I mean everything, goes well, and we finally get a good goalie, we MIGHT be a serious contender in 5 to 6 years. That's when maybe Levi is a blossoming star goalie, Power has become dominant along with Dahlin still in his prime. Cozens, Quinn, etc. several players have to have matured into front line performers and we'd maybe have the required depth and skill for a serious cup run. But a LOT of things have to go right for that possibility. 2 years from now we might be where L.A. is now, 3 years from now we MIGHT be approaching where Carolina was last season, 5 years from now with luck and good decisions we could be competing with Tampa or their equivalent.

So you've got guys with different ages all entering their prime at the same time? It can happen, but it's unlikely. and by leveraged do you mean traded? imo if you don't add key veteran pieces it takes a really long time and if that time frame is too long you end up in cap trouble with too many primes at the same time or else they leave. A healthy build requires winning, then people want to be here and/or want to stay. I doubt there will be a magical coming together. More likely some hits and some misses and thus the need to add those veterans.

You honestly think we are "serious cup contenders" in 2 years???? Well that would truly be something. I think it'll take a lot longer than that.

As a rich hockey fan who doesn't have a clue about hockey. Same as before.

I think he gets his shot this year as I'd predict Anderson doesn't make it through half the season without ending up on IR. UPL will show flashes, but will be inconsistent. Goaltending will be a problem.

Well this is exactly why I was all in on the idea of signing Kadri but moving on from that idea I think it likely Girgensons will center the 4th line so you're likely looking at Thompson, Cozens, Mitts/Krebs, Girgensons. Not good enough imo but I think that's what we will see.

I don't disagree with any of the stuff I cut out. All of it was correct imo and the last sentence above is definitely true. There's no reason for the team not to be better this year. It should be, it has to be. If it isn't, well, I just don't know...... #1. though is unknown. On paper MAYBE they are better prospects. The thing is though, KA has had a lot of extra picks due to the tear down so we definitely SHOULD have more prospects. If we don't end up with a number of NHL starters in time it'll be a colossal failure worse than the previous bad GMs. Similarly, if Mitts develops into a starting top line player, Samuelsson is a full on regular shut down D man, Cozens becomes a top player and Dahlin stays an allstar, well suddenly JBot has given us a core of players (and you can add Thompson and Joker via trade). There isn't much Murray content left, but KA players really still remains to be seen. Considering all the high rated picks (I mean even the Vegas pick worked in our favour) there really is no excuse for some of these prospects giving us what we want and need.

You're misunderstanding me. I was responding to a comment that evaluated KA in a very positive light. My response included saying a GM can only be evaluated fully looking at draft results and although we have many prospects we can't say yet if it's good or bad. When I said this year will tell us a lot, perhaps you put too much in the words "a lot" and maybe it should have read this year will start to tell us. In any event I think this year tells us a few things. 1. How good the coaching choice was. Aside from an unprecedented bad luck injury year (which can always happen)there's no excuse not to win more games than last year. If we don't, Granato has to come into question. 2. Tearing down is over. He did that. Is it now building up. What's the trend? and lastly 3. Are the first group of prospects (like Peterka) stepping in to NHL roles yet, even if minor or partial. His first round of picks might not be fully cooked yet but they should be showing signs and we should get glimpses of their potential. The cupboard has been restocked and now it can continue in a regular annual manner (i.e don't trade your picks away unless it's an impossible to turn down deal) but it's also time to START to see if the prospects are developing into NHL players. I'm not expecting them to jump in and be rookie of the year candidates. I'm not one of those people thinking Quinn and Peterka will be solid regulars as some are expecting, but I do expect to see a few prospects bump Bjork and Vinnie off the roster.

It tells you a lot in terms of progression. How they are developing and are they showing signs. Nothing faster or more than that. The ones from his first draft are the ones that have to start showing some signs of being NHLers.

Yes, BUT, none of this matters unless a number of the prospects become good or at least decent NHL players. So let's look at what he's done pragmatically, because the assessment of most of it is ongoing. 1. Restructured the scouting staff and methodology. Number of prospects has increased due to number of picks acquired but results remain to be seen. This is perhaps the year we see if those picks are starting to work out. 2. Promoted a coach from in house staff. Coach is popular with players, seems to be a good teacher, results have not translated to wins (yet). Coaches have to win. This is the year Granato has to perform and the team must show improvement. If not, is he really a good head coach? Remains to be seen. 3. Traded away the old core. Risto trade was a steal. Big applause. Eichel trade was fair. Results depend on Krebs and the other picks. If it ends up Tuch vs. Eichel, as much as I like Tuch, not a good trade. Wait and see. Reinhart trade depends on Levi signing and being good. If not to either, Florida won that deal but in fairness, he was gone anyway so just give that one a pass for now. 4. Free agency. Nothing of note. Failure in terms of goaltending. 5. Additional trades and signings. Really only Olofsson extended. rest of the moves fairly insignificant (unless I've forgotten one) So what do we have? Are we a better team? We're younger, we have potential, but unless that potential comes to fruition it's just another round trip on the never ending failure train. This year will tell us a lot.

imo you can't just toss a year off a guy's resume because he inherited a mess. new GMs usually inherit a mess, that's why they get hired. I don't think he gets any credit for firing Kreuger (it was an obvious move) or for hiring Granato as interim head coach (who else was an option on the team?). I'm not convinced making Granato full time head coach was any sort of great move either. Was he the choice, or was he the fall back when other options didn't happen? We will never know and they would never say if that was the case. The guy you hire is always the guy you always wanted most. Adams clock ticks from the minute he gets hired.

It's possible he's not telling the truth either. He might just say he's friends with Jack, keeps in touch (sort of) and won't burn any bridges. You never know who might be a team mate next right? After he retires, could lose some numbers like we all do with our work "friends".

Well that part I definitely agree with. I said that year if he didn't sign by the deadline he should have been deadline traded and KA should have started looking at other options (goalies were moved around and we could have taken one to make him expansion draft exempt for example). Assuming he could sign him was dumb. JBot let Skinner hold him hostage, KA got leveraged by Ullmark. This team needs to realize it can't take players on faith. We are not a desirable destination at this point. As for Ullmark not wanting to mentor UPL etc. he would have if he'd signed. It's his character. Everything I've heard about him is he's just a likeable guy and other players love him. He didn't go to Boston to mentor Swayman, but they bonded as team mates and he doesn't view him as an adversary. So he accepts the mentor role and they help each other. He's a positive team influence, that's all. I'm sure Craig Anderson is a good influence as well, it's just that he's too old. He should coach, not play. Comrie? I have no idea what sort of team mate he will be or if he will be any good at all. On paper, we have sub par goaltending - AGAIN.

My take at this point (although the last two episodes might reveal some info that changes it) is the B&W is because his life is empty and as I said, the obvious metaphor lacking colour, because he was addicted to the life, the thrills, the money and power it brought, and now that it's all gone he has nothing and finds he can't live without it. So in the end he will do something foolish and come to an end from going after that thrill/life rather than settling for a lesser boring anonymity. So maybe as a viewer it'll be ambiguous and you can take it as a suicide of sorts or a Dostoevsky type resolution, but I think it's just addiction. He simply can't live without being Saul rather than Jimmy or Gene. It's who/what he is, even if it's a fiction he created. I just hope they give us a little more on how Kim left. It's a little unsatisfying at this point if she just "left" without more details. To me anyway. Everyone else we already know how they ended from Breaking Bad.

Unless they are just saving money 🙂 I'm going to assume the black and white implies a lack of colour in his life, i.e. unhappiness.

I don't get where this notion comes from that young rookie goalie prospects will stay away from teams that already have goalies. If that was the case all the young goalies would sign where exactly, cause most teams already have starting goalies. Does it look like Swayman's having a problem with Ullmark being on his team? I know you probably hate the Bruins but look at them closely and tell me Ullmark wouldn't have been a great mentor for a UPL, Levi and/or Portello?